Bibliographic citations
Rabanal, D., (2021). La Fe Pública Registral, en los casos de fraude inmobiliario, a propósito de la sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional recaída en el Expediente. N° 00018- 2015-PI/TC [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/18626
Rabanal, D., La Fe Pública Registral, en los casos de fraude inmobiliario, a propósito de la sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional recaída en el Expediente. N° 00018- 2015-PI/TC []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2021. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/18626
@misc{renati/526707,
title = "La Fe Pública Registral, en los casos de fraude inmobiliario, a propósito de la sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional recaída en el Expediente. N° 00018- 2015-PI/TC",
author = "Rabanal Florián, Dannery Tais",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2021"
}
One of the biggest legal security problems of the first decade of the 21st century was caused by real estate fraud, the phenomenon of which meant the loss of the assets of countless Peruvian owners. As a result of the prosecution of these crimes, the precariousness of the documentary verification procedures of the public registers and the officials involved in the transfers of real estate became visible. Likewise, the diversity of judging criteria in the resolution of these cases was evident since, on occasions, they returned the property to the owners and, on others, they granted it to the so-called third-party registry. Under this framework, the legislative power issues Law No. 30313 - Law of Opposition to the Registration Procedure in Process and Cancellation of the Registration Entry for Identity Impersonation or Forgery of Documentation and Amendment of Articles 2013 and 2014 of the Civil Code and Articles 4 and 55 and the Fifth and Sixth Complementary Transitory and Final Provisions of Legislative Decree 1049 - whose constitutionality was rightly questioned and, recently, wrongly resolved by the Constitutional Court, in our opinion. Such normative provision grants protection to the third party registry, before the owner, in cases of Identity Impersonation and Document Falsification in the application of the principle of registry public faith. Said criterion has been endorsed by the Constitutional Court in the sentence passed in the file N ° 00018-2015-PI / TC although the act originates the ownership of the third party is illegal. Therefore, in this research of a dogmatic documentary order, we intend to outline the historical, logical, and normative arguments that sustain that, in the face of real estate fraud, the principle of public registry faith should not be applied. Its application would be configured as an incentive to the commission of crimes that violate the public faith and would contravene public regulations.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License