Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
Palacios, R., (2017). La vulneración al principio de pluralidad de instancias en el proceso arbitral [Tesis, Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego]. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12759/2520
Palacios, R., La vulneración al principio de pluralidad de instancias en el proceso arbitral [Tesis]. : Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego; 2017. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12759/2520
@phdthesis{renati/376060,
title = "La vulneración al principio de pluralidad de instancias en el proceso arbitral",
author = "Palacios Bran, Roberto Alejandro",
publisher = "Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego",
year = "2017"
}
Title: La vulneración al principio de pluralidad de instancias en el proceso arbitral
Authors(s): Palacios Bran, Roberto Alejandro
Advisor(s): Angulo Espino, Carlos Humberto
Keywords: Pluralidad de Instancias; Instancia Unica
Issue Date: 2017
Institution: Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego
Abstract: El arbitraje debe convivir con la justicia ordinaria, pero para que esta convivencia
sea armónica, habrá de establecerse una relación de cooperación entre ambos
mecanismos a la vez los árbitros deben comprender las limitaciones que les impone
su origen convivencial, la falta de imperium y el orden público, hacen necesario
que los jueces compartan la idea del arbitraje como sistema que coopera en la
solución de conflictos, prestando su auxilio cuando se deba recurrir a ellos para
ejecutar el laudo. Si para lograr el pleno reconocimiento de las garantías procesales
fundamentales resguardados en el ejercicio de la función jurisdiccional, habrá
de considerarse jurisdicción, jurisdicción parcial o jurisdicción restringida en el que
permita su acercamiento y reconocimiento que las garantías constitucionales en
materia procesal no le es ajena y deberá ajustarse totalmente a ellas e impedir
cualquiera forma de vulneración o inobservancia.
Por otra parte que las partes en un proceso arbitral no configuren o acuerden,
antes o durante el desarrollo del proceso arbitral, sobre la posibilidad de recurrir
a una segunda instancia a través de una apelación contra el laudo, lo hacen en
virtud de la aplicación del principio de determinación (fundado en el artículo 361 del
Código Procesal Civil). El no acordar esto último no significa rechazar en el caso
en concreto a este principio. Pero, al ser este un principio en el que se necesita
de un acuerdo concurrente entre por lo menos dos de las partes, el no llegar a
un acuerdo rechazaría de forma inmediata en el proceso arbitral su aplicación, sin
existir medio o mecanismo alguno para lograr la posibilidad de que entre en juego
o se active el principio de pluralidad de instancias. No habiendo acuerdo basado en
el principio de determinación, entonces el principio es derrotado, o inaplicable, en
virtud del artículo 62 del Decreto Legislativo 1071. Luego, el principio de pluralidad
de instancias es derrotado también por el mismo artículo.No existe duda alguna que así tengamos en cuenta cualquier principio como elemento del debido proceso, y las partes no lleguen a un acuerdo en la configuración de las instancias, estos serán derrotados por la regla contenida en el artículo 62, y por los otros principios aplicables al proceso arbitral. Lo que hace concluir
que existe un conflicto y vulneración «en concreto» del principio de pluralidad de instancias por el artículo 62 del Decreto Legislativo 1071
The arbitration shall live with the regular courts, but for this coexistence is harmonious, cooperative relationship between the two mechanisms to be established once the referees must understand the limitations imposed by their convivial origin, lack of imperium and order, make it necessary for judges to share the idea of arbitration as a system that cooperates in resolving conflicts, with their aid when they need to use them to enforce the award. If achieving full recognition of the fundamental procedural guarantees sheltered in the exercise of the judicial function, will be considered jurisdiction, partial jurisdiction or restricted jurisdiction in permitting their approach and recognition that the constitutional guarantees of procedural matters is no stranger and shall conform fully to them and prevent any form of violation or non-compliance. Furthermore the parties to an arbitration agree not set or before or during the arbitral process, the possibility of using a second instance through an appeal against the award, they do under the application of determination principle. The latter does not agree does not mean rejecting the particular case of this principle. But as this is a principle which requires a concurrent agreement between at least two of the parties, unable to reach agreement immediately reject the arbitration process your application, with no means or mechanism to achieve the possibility that comes into play or the first of multiple instances are active. There being no agreement based on the principle of determination, then the principle is defeated, or unenforceable pursuant to Article 62 of Legislative Decree 1071. Then the principle of plurality of instances is defeated also by the Article. There is no doubt that so keep in mind any principle as an element of due process, and the parties do not reach agreement on the configuration of instances, they will be defeated by the rule contained in Article 62 and the other principles Arbitration process. What makes the conclusion that there is a conflict and violation ’in particular’ the principle of plurality of instances per article 62 of Legislative Decree 1071.
The arbitration shall live with the regular courts, but for this coexistence is harmonious, cooperative relationship between the two mechanisms to be established once the referees must understand the limitations imposed by their convivial origin, lack of imperium and order, make it necessary for judges to share the idea of arbitration as a system that cooperates in resolving conflicts, with their aid when they need to use them to enforce the award. If achieving full recognition of the fundamental procedural guarantees sheltered in the exercise of the judicial function, will be considered jurisdiction, partial jurisdiction or restricted jurisdiction in permitting their approach and recognition that the constitutional guarantees of procedural matters is no stranger and shall conform fully to them and prevent any form of violation or non-compliance. Furthermore the parties to an arbitration agree not set or before or during the arbitral process, the possibility of using a second instance through an appeal against the award, they do under the application of determination principle. The latter does not agree does not mean rejecting the particular case of this principle. But as this is a principle which requires a concurrent agreement between at least two of the parties, unable to reach agreement immediately reject the arbitration process your application, with no means or mechanism to achieve the possibility that comes into play or the first of multiple instances are active. There being no agreement based on the principle of determination, then the principle is defeated, or unenforceable pursuant to Article 62 of Legislative Decree 1071. Then the principle of plurality of instances is defeated also by the Article. There is no doubt that so keep in mind any principle as an element of due process, and the parties do not reach agreement on the configuration of instances, they will be defeated by the rule contained in Article 62 and the other principles Arbitration process. What makes the conclusion that there is a conflict and violation ’in particular’ the principle of plurality of instances per article 62 of Legislative Decree 1071.
Link to repository: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12759/2520
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego. Escuela de Postgrado
Grade or title: Doctor en Derecho
Register date: 18-Apr-2017
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.