Bibliographic citations
Usco, D., (2023). Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución de la Primera Sala del Tribunal Registral de Lima N° 235-2021-SUNARP-TR [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/25722
Usco, D., Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución de la Primera Sala del Tribunal Registral de Lima N° 235-2021-SUNARP-TR []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2023. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/25722
@misc{renati/539441,
title = "Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución de la Primera Sala del Tribunal Registral de Lima N° 235-2021-SUNARP-TR",
author = "Usco Rutti, Deyvid",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2023"
}
In this legal report, a critical analysis is made of the arguments and the decision adopted by the First Chamber of the Registry Court of Lima in Resolution No. 235-2021-SUNARP-TR, dated May 13, 2021. In this resolution, the Registry Court resolved the specific case, making an extensive interpretation of the first precedent of mandatory observance, approved in the One Hundred and Ninth Plenary Session of the Registry Court, which refers to the cancellation of the registry entry where the property right of a property is registered, and its consequent de-registration, due to waiver of the property right. Through this legal report, the author intends to question the analysis adopted by the Registry Court in the mentioned resolution, to the extent that it ratifies the provisions of the mandatory compliance precedent, ignoring to consider that said precedent is not clear in its content. Not only this, but also, it erroneously applies said precedent, generating uncertainty and unpredictability in the registration system. In this sense, the author will analyze four relevant legal problems that were identified in said resolution, which will be analyzed in this report from a critical perspective. The author highlights the importance that the Registry Court review again the criterion adopted in the mandatory compliance precedent, limiting itself to making a restricted interpretation of the waiver of the property right, to the extent that there is no current regulatory framework in our national legal system that allows and enables its development in the area of civil law. In addition, the author considers that the fact of allowing the deregistration of a property in our system contravenes our current national regulations.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License