Bibliographic citations
Suasnabar, L., (2019). La reforma procesal de la justicia laboral en el Perú : análisis de las sentencias emitidas en los procesos de pagos de beneficios sociales en la Corte Superior de Justicia de Junin en el periodo 2016 [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/14852
Suasnabar, L., La reforma procesal de la justicia laboral en el Perú : análisis de las sentencias emitidas en los procesos de pagos de beneficios sociales en la Corte Superior de Justicia de Junin en el periodo 2016 []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2019. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/14852
@mastersthesis{sunedu/2660039,
title = "La reforma procesal de la justicia laboral en el Perú : análisis de las sentencias emitidas en los procesos de pagos de beneficios sociales en la Corte Superior de Justicia de Junin en el periodo 2016",
author = "Suasnabar Tolentino, Luis Ricardo",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2019"
}
It has been more than eight years since the New Labor Procedure (Act 29497) was enacted, in which oral and public procedure on the trial was established as a litigation system. Also, the structure of procedure and evidence activity have been modified to reinforce the content of the values of immediacy, concentration, speed, procedural economy and truthfulness. However, judicial experiences in payment of social benefits cases, shows that labor procedure reform is still pending of consolidation because judges and lawyers are not yet properly ready in oral arguments, reducing the effectiveness of the new labor procedure, especially in the content of the “principio de primacía de la realidad”, which means the primacy of the facts (evidences) over formal documents. So, the oral arguments of the parties during the confrontation, without a proper conduction of the judge, just turns the debate into a reading of documents, causing harm to users with defects of motivation in judicial decisions. On the other hand, judges still do not use properly the terms of anticipated trial when the whole evidence is documentary, and even worse, the rules of New Labor Procedure has not sufficiently specified how the admission of documentary evidence should be carried out, especially when they offer a lot of documents to be reviewed.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.