Inejecutabilidad de hipoteca y razonamiento probatorio en la resolución del incidente de observaciones y aprobación de tasación actualizada para remate: el caso del expediente N° 2729- 2018-0-1001-JR-CI-05-Cusco
Fecha
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Acceso al texto completo solo para la Comunidad PUCP
Resumen
Razonamiento y derecho probatorios, quaestio juris y quaestio facti, son
conceptos que deberían complementarse para una motivación judicial como un
estándar de resolución o de la decisión jurisdiccional. Así también nos informa el
profesor Yordi Ferrer Beltrán (Ferrer: 2019; 2023) y como producto de la
inferencia probatoria, lógica y procedimiento racional que proponía Michele
Taruffo. Todo en busca de la verdad de los hechos o verdad material para el
logro del proceso civil e incluso, del Derecho Procesal en su vinculación a la
celeridad y economía procesal, considerando la fuerza normativa y positiva de
los principios constitucionales en la administración de justicia.
Una de las causas de la demora en la ejecución forzada es el contradictorio del
demandado o tercero en el proceso de ejecución de garantías reales de hipoteca.
Este derecho obliga al Juez a resolver y tratar de proseguir hacia el remate; sin
embargo, no existe regulación específica ni trabajos teóricos sobre la decisión y
la motivación del razonamiento probatorio en la valoración de los hechos.
Generalmente se motiva sobre el derecho y esto no está en cuestión.
El presente trabajo, tiene por objetivo evaluar e identificar que estándares utilizan
los jueces o mejor dicho, ¿cómo resuelven?; pues existe alta incidencia del uso
de sentido común y máximas de la experiencia que no condicen o responden al
modelo del Estado Democrático y de Derecho Constitucional. Tanto más la etapa
pendiente y avanzada de la propuesta de reforma de nuestro Código Procesal
Civil de 1993.
A partir del caso fuente del presente trabajo, hemos identificado que la decisión
judicial que resuelve este y otro tipo de incidentes procesales en etapa de
ejecución forzada obligan a la necesidad de evaluar si es conveniente o no seguir
el camino trazado o la probable incertidumbre en la finalidad concreta y abstracta
del proceso judicial para estos casos.
Evidentiary reasoning and law, quaestio juris and quaestio facti, are concepts that should complement each other to provide judicial motivation as a standard for resolution or jurisdictional decision-making. This is also the position of Professor Yordi Ferrer Beltrán (Ferrer 2019; 2023), and as a product of the evidentiary inference, logic, and rational procedure proposed by Michele Taruffo. All of this is in pursuit of the truth of the facts, or material truth, for the achievement of civil proceedings and even procedural law in its connection to procedural speed and economy, considering the normative and positive force of constitutional principles in the administration of justice. One of the causes of delay in forced execution is the objection of the defendant or third party in the process of enforcing real mortgage guarantees. This right obliges the judge to resolve the matter and attempt to proceed with the auction; however, there is no specific regulation or theoretical work on the decision and 3 the motivation of evidentiary reasoning in the assessment of the facts. Generally, the motivation is based on the law, and this is not in question. The objective of this work is to evaluate and identify the standards judges use, or rather, how they resolve cases. There is a high incidence of the use of common sense and maxims of experience that do not align with or respond to the model of a democratic state and constitutional rule of law. This is especially relevant in the context of the proposed reform of our 1993 Code of Civil Procedure. Based on the case that serves as the basis for this work, we have identified that the judicial decision resolving this and other types of procedural incidents during the enforcement stage necessitates an evaluation of whether or not it is advisable to continue along the established path, or to consider the potential uncertainty regarding the concrete and abstract purpose of the judicial process in these cases.
Evidentiary reasoning and law, quaestio juris and quaestio facti, are concepts that should complement each other to provide judicial motivation as a standard for resolution or jurisdictional decision-making. This is also the position of Professor Yordi Ferrer Beltrán (Ferrer 2019; 2023), and as a product of the evidentiary inference, logic, and rational procedure proposed by Michele Taruffo. All of this is in pursuit of the truth of the facts, or material truth, for the achievement of civil proceedings and even procedural law in its connection to procedural speed and economy, considering the normative and positive force of constitutional principles in the administration of justice. One of the causes of delay in forced execution is the objection of the defendant or third party in the process of enforcing real mortgage guarantees. This right obliges the judge to resolve the matter and attempt to proceed with the auction; however, there is no specific regulation or theoretical work on the decision and 3 the motivation of evidentiary reasoning in the assessment of the facts. Generally, the motivation is based on the law, and this is not in question. The objective of this work is to evaluate and identify the standards judges use, or rather, how they resolve cases. There is a high incidence of the use of common sense and maxims of experience that do not align with or respond to the model of a democratic state and constitutional rule of law. This is especially relevant in the context of the proposed reform of our 1993 Code of Civil Procedure. Based on the case that serves as the basis for this work, we have identified that the judicial decision resolving this and other types of procedural incidents during the enforcement stage necessitates an evaluation of whether or not it is advisable to continue along the established path, or to consider the potential uncertainty regarding the concrete and abstract purpose of the judicial process in these cases.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Hipotecas--Perú, Procedimiento civil--Perú, Derecho--Interpretación, Prueba (Derecho), Tutela--Perú
Citación
Colecciones
item.page.endorsement
item.page.review
item.page.supplemented
item.page.referenced
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto donde se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este ítem se describe como https://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
