Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
Trefogli, F., (2022). Informe sobre la Resolución N°2758-2019/SPC-INDECOPI [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/21635
Trefogli, F., Informe sobre la Resolución N°2758-2019/SPC-INDECOPI []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2022. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/21635
@misc{renati/537840,
title = "Informe sobre la Resolución N°2758-2019/SPC-INDECOPI",
author = "Trefogli Wong, Franchesca Nicolle",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2022"
}
Title: Informe sobre la Resolución N°2758-2019/SPC-INDECOPI
Authors(s): Trefogli Wong, Franchesca Nicolle
Advisor(s): Guevara Paredes, Melisa
Keywords: Protección del consumidor--Legislación--Perú; Mujeres--Legislación--Perú; Mujeres--Discriminación; Discriminación--Legislación--Perú
OCDE field: https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.01
Issue Date: 15-Feb-2022
Institution: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract: La Ley 29571, Código de Protección y Defensa del Consumidor en su artículo 1d reconoce el
derecho de todo consumidor a “un trato justo y equitativo en toda transacción comercial y a
no ser discriminados por motivo de origen, raza, sexo, idioma, religión, opinión, condición
económica o de cualquier otra índole”, por lo tanto, prohíbe expresamente que los proveedores
discriminen a los consumidores, precisando que todo trato diferenciado debe responder a
causas objetivas y razonables; en ese sentido, no todo trato diferenciado es discriminación sino
precisamente el que no se fundamente en causas objetivas y razonables.
En ese contexto, el presente informe se desarrollará la figura de discriminación en el consumo
a partir del análisis a la Resolución Final N° 2758-2019/SPC-INDECOPI (Asociación de
Consumidores Indignados Perú contra el restaurante La Rosa Náutica S.A.) en la cual la Sala
Especializada en Protección al Consumidor del Indecopi declaró fundada la denuncia
interpuesta en contra del restaurante la Rosa Náutica, pues este último habría incurrido en
discriminación por haber entregado cartas diferenciadas a las mujeres, en las cuales se omitía
la información de los precios, siendo que este actuar no estaría fundamentado en motivos
objetivos y racionales.
En ese sentido, en el presente informe se analizará la argumentación desarrollada por el
Indecopi para resolver la denuncia por discriminación en el consumo, así como las políticas
internas alegadas por el restaurante la Rosa Náutica para entregar cartas diferenciadas a sus
comensales. Finalmente, se cuestionará la sanción impuesta por la Autoridad.
Law 29571: Consumer Protection and Defense Code, in article 1d, recognizes the right of every consumer to “fair and equitable treatment in all commercial transactions and not to be discriminated against on the basis of origin, race, sex, language, religion, opinion. , economic condition or of any other nature ”, and, consequently, it expressly prohibits suppliers from discriminating against consumers, specifying that all treatment must obey objective and reasonable causes; In this sense, not all differential treatment is discrimination, but precisely that which is not based on objective and reasonable causes. In this context, this report will develop the figure of discrimination in consumption based on the analysis of Final Resolution No. 2758-2019 / SPC-INDECOPI (Association of Indignant Consumers Peru against the restaurant La Rosa Nautica SA) in the which the Indecopi Specialized Room for Consumer Protection founded the complaint filed against the Rosa Nautica restaurant, since the latter would have incurred discrimination for having delivered differentiated letters to women, in which the price information was omitted, being that this act would not be based on objective and rational motives. In this sense, this report will analyze the arguments developed by Indecopi to resolve the complaint of discrimination in consumption, as well as the internal policies alleged by the La Rosa Nautica restaurant to deliver differentiated menus to its guests. Finally, the sanction imposed by the Authority will be questioned.
Law 29571: Consumer Protection and Defense Code, in article 1d, recognizes the right of every consumer to “fair and equitable treatment in all commercial transactions and not to be discriminated against on the basis of origin, race, sex, language, religion, opinion. , economic condition or of any other nature ”, and, consequently, it expressly prohibits suppliers from discriminating against consumers, specifying that all treatment must obey objective and reasonable causes; In this sense, not all differential treatment is discrimination, but precisely that which is not based on objective and reasonable causes. In this context, this report will develop the figure of discrimination in consumption based on the analysis of Final Resolution No. 2758-2019 / SPC-INDECOPI (Association of Indignant Consumers Peru against the restaurant La Rosa Nautica SA) in the which the Indecopi Specialized Room for Consumer Protection founded the complaint filed against the Rosa Nautica restaurant, since the latter would have incurred discrimination for having delivered differentiated letters to women, in which the price information was omitted, being that this act would not be based on objective and rational motives. In this sense, this report will analyze the arguments developed by Indecopi to resolve the complaint of discrimination in consumption, as well as the internal policies alleged by the La Rosa Nautica restaurant to deliver differentiated menus to its guests. Finally, the sanction imposed by the Authority will be questioned.
Link to repository: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/21635
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Facultad de Derecho.
Grade or title: Abogado
Juror: Solorzano Solorzano, Raul Roy; Bardales Mendoza, Enrique Rosendo
Register date: 15-Feb-2022
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License