Informe jurídico sobre la Resolución N° 18 signado en el Expediente N° 00042-2015, Caso ONCOSERV vs Gobierno Regional de Arequipa
Fecha
Autores
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
El presente informe analiza los principales problemas jurídicos derivados de la
Resolución Nro. 18, de fecha 20 de octubre de 2015 (en adelante, Resolución),
expedida por la Primera Sala Civil Subespecialidad Comercial de la Corte
Superior de Justicia de Lima (en adelante, Colegiado o Sala), en mérito al
recurso de anulación de laudo interpuesto por el Gobierno Regional de Arequipa
contra el laudo emitido en el arbitraje con la empresa ONCOSERV Arequipa
SAC. Puntualmente, el análisis gira alrededor de la decisión del Colegiado de
declarar la nulidad del laudo, a causa de la vulneración del debido proceso por
afectarse el principio de imparcialidad ante la corrupción en dicho arbitraje.
Bajo ese contexto, se procederá con un análisis exhaustivo basado en normativa
aplicable, doctrina y jurisprudencia para dar respuesta a los problemas jurídicos
planteados, los cuales están enfocados en establecer si el laudo fue válidamente
anulado.
Por ello, se empezará abordando específicamente la causal prevista en el
artículo 63 inciso 1 literal b) del Decreto Legislativo N° 1071, a fin de determinar
si el Colegiado aplicó correctamente dicha causal en el caso. Luego, se
desarrollará respecto a la transgresión del Orden Público como consecuencia de
la corrupción en el arbitraje, con el propósito de sugerir una mejor forma de
protección legislativa. Finalmente, se evaluará si existe otra vía de
cuestionamiento cuando la corrupción es descubierta vencido el plazo para
interponer el recurso de anulación de laudo.
This report analyzes the main legal issues arising from Resolution No. 18, dated October 20, 2015 (hereinafter, Resolution), issued by the First Civil Chamber, Commercial Subspecialty, of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima (hereinafter, the Court or Chamber), regarding the appeal for annulment of the award filed by the Regional Government of Arequipa against the award issued in the arbitration with ONCOSERV Arequipa SAC. Specifically, the analysis revolves around the Court's decision to declare the award null and void, due to the violation of due process due to the principle of impartiality in the face of corruption in said arbitration. In this context, a thorough analysis based on applicable regulations, doctrine, and jurisprudence will be carried out to address the legal issues raised, which are focused on establishing whether the award was validly annulled. Therefore, we will begin by specifically addressing the grounds provided for in Article 63, paragraph 1, letter b) of Legislative Decree No. 1071, in order to determine whether the Court correctly applied said grounds in the case. We will then discuss the violation of public order resulting from corruption in arbitration, with the aim of suggesting a better form of legislative protection. Finally, we will assess whether another avenue for challenging corruption is discovered after the deadline for filing an appeal for annulment of the award has expired.
This report analyzes the main legal issues arising from Resolution No. 18, dated October 20, 2015 (hereinafter, Resolution), issued by the First Civil Chamber, Commercial Subspecialty, of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima (hereinafter, the Court or Chamber), regarding the appeal for annulment of the award filed by the Regional Government of Arequipa against the award issued in the arbitration with ONCOSERV Arequipa SAC. Specifically, the analysis revolves around the Court's decision to declare the award null and void, due to the violation of due process due to the principle of impartiality in the face of corruption in said arbitration. In this context, a thorough analysis based on applicable regulations, doctrine, and jurisprudence will be carried out to address the legal issues raised, which are focused on establishing whether the award was validly annulled. Therefore, we will begin by specifically addressing the grounds provided for in Article 63, paragraph 1, letter b) of Legislative Decree No. 1071, in order to determine whether the Court correctly applied said grounds in the case. We will then discuss the violation of public order resulting from corruption in arbitration, with the aim of suggesting a better form of legislative protection. Finally, we will assess whether another avenue for challenging corruption is discovered after the deadline for filing an appeal for annulment of the award has expired.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Arbitraje y laudo--Perú--Arequipa, Recurso de anulación--Perú--Arequipa, Corrupción políitca--Perú--Arequipa, Corporaciones médicas--Perú--Arequipa, Gobiernos subnacionales--Perú--Arequipa
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 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
