Bibliographic citations
Pacheco, L., (2024). Informe jurídico sobre el laudo CCI N° 201513/ASM: controversia entre el Consorcio Nippon Koei-Oist y el Programa Nacional de Saneamiento Urbano [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/28216
Pacheco, L., Informe jurídico sobre el laudo CCI N° 201513/ASM: controversia entre el Consorcio Nippon Koei-Oist y el Programa Nacional de Saneamiento Urbano []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2024. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/28216
@misc{renati/531419,
title = "Informe jurídico sobre el laudo CCI N° 201513/ASM: controversia entre el Consorcio Nippon Koei-Oist y el Programa Nacional de Saneamiento Urbano",
author = "Pacheco Chavarría, Lesly del Pilar",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2024"
}
This report consists of an analysis of the arbitration award issued in Case No. 20513/ASM. This arbitration arose from the execution of Loan Agreement JBIC/PEP25, between the National Urban Sanitation Program (hereinafter, PNSU) and the Nippon Koei -Oist Consortium (hereinafter, the Consortium) for the execution of the works consultancy contract for the implementation of the project “Improvement and Expansion of the Drinking Water Supply and Sewerage Systems of the cities of Piura- Castilla and Chimbote“ (hereinafter, the Consultancy Contract), within the framework of Law No. 26850, Law of Contracts of the National Urban Sanitation Program (hereinafter, the Consultancy Contract), The Consulting Contract), under Law No. 26850, State Contracting and Procurement Law (hereinafter, LCAE) and the Regulations of the State Contracting and Procurement Law (hereinafter, RLCAE) approved by Supreme Decree No. 039-98-PCM, rules in force at that time. The controversy lies in the fact that, after the completion of its services, the Consortium submitted its settlement of the Consulting Contract; however, the Entity sent a pronouncement rejecting said settlement; however, the Consortium considered that said settlement was not valid, since it did not comply with the requirements to constitute an administrative act. On the other hand, the PNSU considered that it did comply with the requirements of validity, since it considered that it was a valid, timely and effective administrative act. According to the above, the purpose of this legal report is to analyze the nature of the settlement made by the PNSU, whether it is an administrative act or not, and to determine the validity requirements for its issuance, whether the Entity complied or not with the preparation of the settlement in accordance with the regulations applicable to the case. To this end, the allegations presented by the Consortium, the Entity and the Arbitral Tribunal will be contrasted. In addition, the implications of the liquidation regarding the application of penalties, their nature and procedure in the contract will be discussed. Finally, the issue of the certificate of conformity of service will be discussed.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License