Bibliographic citations
Sánchez, K., (2024). Informe de relevancia jurídica de la Resolución 1492-2023/SPC-INDECOPI: Sue Uribe vs. Estudio Rodríguez Angobaldo S.A.C. y Enrique Varsi, por presuntas infracciones al Código de Protección y Defensa del Consumidor durante la prestación de servicios legales [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/28601
Sánchez, K., Informe de relevancia jurídica de la Resolución 1492-2023/SPC-INDECOPI: Sue Uribe vs. Estudio Rodríguez Angobaldo S.A.C. y Enrique Varsi, por presuntas infracciones al Código de Protección y Defensa del Consumidor durante la prestación de servicios legales []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2024. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/28601
@misc{renati/531191,
title = "Informe de relevancia jurídica de la Resolución 1492-2023/SPC-INDECOPI: Sue Uribe vs. Estudio Rodríguez Angobaldo S.A.C. y Enrique Varsi, por presuntas infracciones al Código de Protección y Defensa del Consumidor durante la prestación de servicios legales",
author = "Sánchez Vargas, Karen Marilyn",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2024"
}
The purpose of this legal report is to perform an analysis on Resolution No. 1492- 2023/SPC-INDECOPI, where the controversy was generated by alleged violations to the Code of Consumer Protection and Defense, in the provision of legal services rendered by Estudio Rodríguez Angobaldo to Ms. Sue Uribe during the years 2017 to 2019. From a material dimension, we will analyze the consumer relationship that would have been configured between the Firm and Ms. Uribe. Subsequently, we will review the scope of the duties and rights existing between the parties, and whether they acted reasonably and diligently, through the observance of compliance with the duties of suitability and information. With respect to the former, we will focus on the obligations rendered in the performance of these services, which may be of means or of results. From the procedural dimension, we will focus on determining whether or not the exception of prescription formulated by the defendants should have operated, as well as on analyzing the use of the theory of objective cognizability, proposed by the Tribunal, to calculate the beginning of the computation of the prescription period. Additionally, with respect to the duty of information, we seek to elucidate whether or not the attempt to charge for a service that was agreed for free and voluntarily constitutes a breach of such duty.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.