Informe jurídico sobre el laudo arbitral emitido en el marco del Caso arbitral No. 0072-2016-CCL entre Metro de Lima Línea 2 S.A. y el Ministerio de Transportes y Comunicaciones
Date
2024-11-20
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
En el presente informe se desarrollará el análisis de la naturaleza del
procedimiento de aplicación de penalidades en los Contratos de Concesión
suscritos en el Perú, centrándose en el caso concreto del laudo emitido en el
caso Arbitral No. 0072-2016-CCL en el marco del Contrato de Concesión suscrito
entre el Ministerio de Transportes y Comunicaciones y Metro de Lima Línea 2
S.A. En ese sentido, se repasará la naturaleza de las penalidades en los
Contratos de Concesión, el rol de OSITRAN, entre otros, para finalmente llegar
a una conclusión que determine los criterios que deben considerarse para la
imposición de penalidades derivadas de incumplimientos o cumplimientos
parciales, tardíos o defectuosos de obligaciones del Concesionario.
De este modo, se concluirá que el procedimiento de imposición de penalidades
en los acuerdos de concesión responde a una naturaleza contractual, motivo por
el cual la impugnación de la aplicación de penalidades responde también a una
vía contractual, de modo que, ante el surgimiento de disputas, puede ser
controvertido a través de la activación de la cláusula de resolución de disputas
del contrato.
Finalmente, a la luz de lo previamente expuesto, se analizará la decisión emitida
por el Tribunal Arbitral en el Caso Arbitral No. 0072-2016-CCL, a través del cual
se redujo las penalidades impuestas por OSITRAN a un 25% de su valor De esta
manera, el informe culminará con la verificación del cumplimiento del principio
de motivación en la decisión del Tribunal Arbitral, respecto a la reducción de las
penalidades solicitada por el Concesionario.
This report will develop the analysis of the nature of the procedure for the application of penalties in the Concession Contracts signed in Peru, focusing on the specific case of the award issued in Arbitration Case No. 0072-2016-CCL in the framework of the Concession Contract signed between the Ministry of Transport and Communications and Metro de Lima Linea 2 S. A. In this regard, the nature of the penalties in the Concession Contracts, the role of OSITRAN, among others, will be reviewed to finally reach a conclusion that determines the criteria to be considered for the imposition of penalties derived from noncompliance or partial, late or defective compliance with the obligations of the Concessionaire. In this way, it will be concluded that the procedure for the imposition of penalties in the concession agreements responds to a contractual nature, which is why the challenge to the application of penalties also responds to a contractual route, so that, in the event of disputes arising, it can be controverted through the activation of the dispute resolution clause of the Main contract. Finally, in light of the above, the decision issued by the Arbitral Tribunal in Arbitration Case No. 0072-2016-CCL will be analyzed, through which the penalties imposed by OSITRAN were reduced to 25% of their value. In this way, the report will culminate with the verification of compliance with the principle of motivation in the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal, regarding the reduction of the penalties requested by the Concessionaire.
This report will develop the analysis of the nature of the procedure for the application of penalties in the Concession Contracts signed in Peru, focusing on the specific case of the award issued in Arbitration Case No. 0072-2016-CCL in the framework of the Concession Contract signed between the Ministry of Transport and Communications and Metro de Lima Linea 2 S. A. In this regard, the nature of the penalties in the Concession Contracts, the role of OSITRAN, among others, will be reviewed to finally reach a conclusion that determines the criteria to be considered for the imposition of penalties derived from noncompliance or partial, late or defective compliance with the obligations of the Concessionaire. In this way, it will be concluded that the procedure for the imposition of penalties in the concession agreements responds to a contractual nature, which is why the challenge to the application of penalties also responds to a contractual route, so that, in the event of disputes arising, it can be controverted through the activation of the dispute resolution clause of the Main contract. Finally, in light of the above, the decision issued by the Arbitral Tribunal in Arbitration Case No. 0072-2016-CCL will be analyzed, through which the penalties imposed by OSITRAN were reduced to 25% of their value. In this way, the report will culminate with the verification of compliance with the principle of motivation in the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal, regarding the reduction of the penalties requested by the Concessionaire.
Description
Keywords
Arbitraje y laudo--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Contratos de concesión--Perú, Servicios públicos--Regulación--Perú
Citation
Collections
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess