Citas bibligráficas
Hernández, A., (2019). Expediente Civil N° 7485-2011 - Proceso de Ejecución de Garantías [Trabajo de suficiencia profesional, Universidad Peruana de las Américas]. http://repositorio.ulasamericas.edu.pe/handle/upa/866
Hernández, A., Expediente Civil N° 7485-2011 - Proceso de Ejecución de Garantías [Trabajo de suficiencia profesional]. : Universidad Peruana de las Américas; 2019. http://repositorio.ulasamericas.edu.pe/handle/upa/866
@misc{renati/4840,
title = "Expediente Civil N° 7485-2011 - Proceso de Ejecución de Garantías",
author = "Hernández Vallejos, Andrea Del Roció",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana de las Américas",
year = "2019"
}
This summary is a synthesis of a guarantee execution process where, the FINANCIAL BANK OF PERU, files a GUARANTEE EXECUTION DEMAND against XINMO CHEN, so that it complies with paying the sum of S /. 99,000.00 soles, expressed in Note 242517, dated December 28, 2010, under warning to proceed to the auction of the property located in Pueblo Joven Señor de los Milagros, Mz. S, Lot 11, Zone III, Comas District, Province and Department of Lima. He argued that, having expired the obligation, the defendant had not complied with the corresponding payment, despite repeated requirements, so it was appropriate to make his payment effective upon warning of executing the guarantee granted. The court appointed the procedural curator to the executed since he verified that he did not comply with appearing and presenting a contradiction, designating Decce Lavaud Galarreta as the procedural curator of the execution, who accepted the charge. Against this, the procedural curator of the executed formulated a contradiction to the execution mandate, under the terms of Article 722 of the Civil Procedure Code, upholding the formal nullity of the title of execution and the lack of procedural requirements. Next, it corresponded that the judge ruled on the contradiction; issuing the final order with which the Second Commercial Civil Court declared the CONTRADICTION formulated by the procedural curator of the executed one INFUNDED. Consequently, he ordered that the real estate property given under guarantee be carried out. Not according to the decision, the procedural curator of the executed filed APPEAL. In view of this, the First Civil Chamber with Commercial Subspecialty complied with issuing the second instance car, with which it decided to REFUSE EXECUTION in the application for foreclosure, NULL everything acted and ordered the final file of these cars. The executing company, exercising its right to challenge, filed an APPEAL OF APPEAL against the final order of the second instance. vii In this regard, the Supreme Chamber complied with issuing a cassation ruling, which declared the appeal to be FOUNDED; consequently, the judgment under appeal was declared NULL; and, ORDERED that the First Civil Chamber with Commercial Subspecialty issue a new resolution. The cars were returned to the Hierarchical Superior and in compliance with what was ordered by the Permanent Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, the final order of the second instance was issued, with which they confirmed the final order of the first instance, the same one that was declared consented, ordering The REMATE of the real estate given as a guarantee, with which the process was concluded, be carried out.
Fichero | Descripción | Tamaño | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|---|
EXPEDIENTE CIVIL Nº 7485-2011 PROCESO DE EJECUCIÓN DE GARANTIAS.pdf | 4.95 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizar/Abrir | |
EXPEDIENTE CIVIL Nº 7485-2011 PROCESO DE EJECUCIÓN DE GARANTIAS.pdf Acceso restringido | 4.95 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizar/Abrir Solicita una copia |
Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons