Bibliographic citations
Rodriguez, R., Morote, V. (2024). ¿Garantía para la víctima o desincentivo para contratar? Análisis al criterio de Indecopi sobre el artículo 17 del Reglamento SOAT [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)]. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/674778
Rodriguez, R., Morote, V. ¿Garantía para la víctima o desincentivo para contratar? Análisis al criterio de Indecopi sobre el artículo 17 del Reglamento SOAT [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional]. PE: Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC); 2024. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/674778
@misc{renati/419523,
title = "¿Garantía para la víctima o desincentivo para contratar? Análisis al criterio de Indecopi sobre el artículo 17 del Reglamento SOAT",
author = "Morote Tarazona, Valeria Elisa",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)",
year = "2024"
}
The aim of this Professional Sufficiency Paper (PSP) is to analyze the Cassation 11254-2022, issued by the Supreme Court on August 10, 2023, related to the request of annulity against an Administrative Resolution followed by La Positiva Seguros. This Cassation is due to an administrative resolution that ordered the granting of compensation for the death of the driver of a minor vehicle that did not carry Mandatory Traffic Accident Insurance, at the time of colliding with a vehicle that was indeed, insured. The legal dispute was first originated at the administrative authority brought before the National Institute for the Defense of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property (INDECOPI), and it culminated judicially with the issuance of the Cassation that is being analyzed through this document. Therefore, further analysis on the most relevant aspects of the legal procedure will be found in chapter one, as well as the determination of the most important arguments issued by the authorities. In chapter number two, the research is developed around the most relevant concepts and their applicability to this specific case, to continue with the identification of the legal problem in chapter three and, some solutions as a contribution. Finally, some conclusions considering the analysis carried out of the case, and the current regulations.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License