Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
Hurtado, I., (2022). La Oposición En La Prescripción Adquisitiva De Dominio Notarial, Como Ejercicio Abusivo De Derecho [Tesis, Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego]. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12759/9545
Hurtado, I., La Oposición En La Prescripción Adquisitiva De Dominio Notarial, Como Ejercicio Abusivo De Derecho [Tesis]. PE: Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego; 2022. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12759/9545
@misc{renati/381473,
title = "La Oposición En La Prescripción Adquisitiva De Dominio Notarial, Como Ejercicio Abusivo De Derecho",
author = "Hurtado Guerrero, Irene Johana",
publisher = "Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego",
year = "2022"
}
Title: La Oposición En La Prescripción Adquisitiva De Dominio Notarial, Como Ejercicio Abusivo De Derecho
Authors(s): Hurtado Guerrero, Irene Johana
Advisor(s): Carbajal Sánchez, Henry Armando
Keywords: Prescripción; Dominio
OCDE field: http://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.00
Issue Date: 2022
Institution: Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego
Abstract: En el campo del Derecho Notarial es común en la actualidad encontrarse con diversos
trámites de prescripción adquisitiva de dominio de inmuebles, puesto que la norma ha
permitido que el notario sea competente para tramitar estos procesos. Lo que no ha previsto
el legislador es el incorrecto uso que hace el opositor de la norma, usando e incluso abusando
los límites de su derecho a oponerse para ejercerlo, evitando así que el derecho del propietario
sea declarado en una vía más eficiente y eficaz y colaborando e incrementando de esta manera
al congestionamiento de la vía judicial.
Esta práctica se ha generalizado tanto que es de conocimiento de los notarios como de los
mismos solicitantes que tienen cierto temor a que se publique su solicitud tal como lo dispone
la norma, al ver temerosos que su proceso pueda verse truncado por un tercero que no tiene
acreditado su derecho sobre el bien.
Es por ello que, para solucionar los problemas que surgen a raíz de la existencia de una norma
apertus que permite que cualquier tercero pueda ponerse a este tipo de trámites, se propone
como hipótesis la siguiente: “la oposición en la prescripción adquisitiva de dominio notarial
al no requerir que se acredite la legitimidad o interés, como de medio probatorio que la
sustente en su formulación, representa un ejercicio abusivo de derecho”.
Es así, que con la finalidad de demostrar que resulta necesario que se exijan mayores
formalidades y la acreditación de una legitimidad y un interés para oponerse, se desarrolló el
Marco Teórico enfocado en la función notarial; analizando las diferencias entre posesión y
propiedad, considerando la prescripción adquisitiva de dominio en las distintas posiciones
doctrinarias relevantes sobre el mismo tema, con especial enfoque en el quehacer notarial y el
7
ejercicio abusivo del derecho a oponerse; finalizando la presente investigación con las
conclusiones y recomendaciones a las que se alcanzó al término de la investigación.
Para tal fin se recurrió a la Investigación inductiva, asimismo la investigación se ubica en la
variante jurídico-social al haberse analizado la regulación normativa sobre la prescripción
adquisitiva de dominio en la vía notarial y la repercusión que tiene en la sociedad peruana.
In the field of notarial law, it is currently common to find various procedures for the prescription for the acquisition of dominion since the norm has allowed the notary to be competent to conduct these processes. What the legislator has not foreseen the incorrect use that the opponent will make of this rule, using the limits of his right to oppose in an abusive way, thus avoiding that owner’s rights has been declared in a faster and more efficient way, collaborating to the decongestion of the procedural burden. This practice has expanded so much that it is known to notaries and owner themselves who have some fear that their process may be frustrated by a person who does not have credited his right on the property. That is why, in order to solve the problems that come with the existence of a rule so open that it allows any third party to frustrated this type of procedure, the following hypothesis is proposed: “the opposition in these procedures by not requiring that legitimacy or interest be accredited, as a means of proof that supports it in its formulation, it represents an abusive exercise of right ”. In that order of ideas, to prove that it is necessary to require greater formalities and accreditation of interest and legitimacy to oppose, the Theoretical Framework was developed focused on the notarial function; analyzing the differences between possession and property, considering the prescription for the acquisition of dominion and relevant comparative doctrines on the same subject, with special focus on the notarial process and the abusive exercise of the right to oppose; ending the present investigation with the final conclusions and recommendations that were reached at the end of the investigation. 9 Inductive research was used for this purpose, also the investigation is located in the legal social variant because the operation of the regulation on acquisitive prescription of domain in the notarial route and its impact on Peruvian society was analyzed
In the field of notarial law, it is currently common to find various procedures for the prescription for the acquisition of dominion since the norm has allowed the notary to be competent to conduct these processes. What the legislator has not foreseen the incorrect use that the opponent will make of this rule, using the limits of his right to oppose in an abusive way, thus avoiding that owner’s rights has been declared in a faster and more efficient way, collaborating to the decongestion of the procedural burden. This practice has expanded so much that it is known to notaries and owner themselves who have some fear that their process may be frustrated by a person who does not have credited his right on the property. That is why, in order to solve the problems that come with the existence of a rule so open that it allows any third party to frustrated this type of procedure, the following hypothesis is proposed: “the opposition in these procedures by not requiring that legitimacy or interest be accredited, as a means of proof that supports it in its formulation, it represents an abusive exercise of right ”. In that order of ideas, to prove that it is necessary to require greater formalities and accreditation of interest and legitimacy to oppose, the Theoretical Framework was developed focused on the notarial function; analyzing the differences between possession and property, considering the prescription for the acquisition of dominion and relevant comparative doctrines on the same subject, with special focus on the notarial process and the abusive exercise of the right to oppose; ending the present investigation with the final conclusions and recommendations that were reached at the end of the investigation. 9 Inductive research was used for this purpose, also the investigation is located in the legal social variant because the operation of the regulation on acquisitive prescription of domain in the notarial route and its impact on Peruvian society was analyzed
Link to repository: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12759/9545
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego. Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Políticas
Grade or title: Abogado
Juror: Estrada Diaz, Juan José; Tapia Diaz, Jessie Catherine; Vera Vásquez, Kelly Janet
Register date: 3-Oct-2022
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License