¿Establecimiento de propiedad definitiva en un predio con propiedad temporal?: Crítica a la Resolución N° 1547-2024-SUNARP-TR (NSIR-T)
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2025-04-02
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Acceso al texto completo solo para la Comunidad PUCP
Abstract
En el presente artículo se busca analizar y criticar la Resolución N° 1547-2024-
SUNARP-TR para evaluar los problemas que conlleva la interpretación del
Tribunal Registral respecto de la consolidación de la propiedad definitiva sobre
dos secciones de propiedad exclusiva de un régimen de propiedad horizontal
constituido sobre una edificación superficiaria, como consecuencia de la
adquisición de los derechos de propiedad sobre las referidas secciones de
propiedad exclusiva, y de la adquisición en simultáneo de una cuota de acciones
y derechos sobre el derecho de superficie respectivo y de una cuota de acciones
y derechos sobre el predio matriz. Para ello, primero, se procederá a exponer los
hechos del caso, tanto desde la posición que tienen los solicitantes, como la
posición del Registrador que revisó el caso materia de análisis en primera
instancia y la posición final del Tribunal Registral; luego, se realizará una
exposición de los conceptos previos necesarios para comprender la discusión
del caso, entre ellos, el derecho de superficie, la propiedad horizontal (en nuestro
país bajo los regímenes de propiedad exclusiva y propiedad común), y la
copropiedad; finalmente, se realizará la crítica respectiva sobre cada aspecto
relevante en la decisión final del Tribunal Registral, es especial, respecto a qué
implica la transferencia de un porcentaje de participación sobre el derecho de
superficie, qué implica la transferencia de un porcentaje similar de participación
sobre el predio matriz y qué implica realmente la consolidación pretendida de los
derechos de propiedad y las cuotas adquiridas.
This article seeks to analyse and criticise Resolution N° 1547-2024-SUNARP-TR in order to evaluate the problems involved in the interpretation of the Registry Court with regard to the consolidation of the definitive property of two sections of exclusive property of an horizontal property regime constituted on a surface building, as a consequence of the acquisition of the property rights over the referred sections of exclusive property, and of the simultaneous acquisition of a shares and rights quota over the respective surface right and of a shares and rights quota over the parent property. For this end, it will be presented the facts of the case from the position of the applicants, from the position of the Registrar who reviewed the case under analysis at first instance and, then, from the final position of the Registry Court. After that, it will be made a presentation of the previous concepts that are necessary to understand in the discussion of this case, among them, the surface right, the horizontal property regimen (in our country under the regimes of exclusive property and common property), and coownership. Finally, it will be made the respective criticism on each relevant aspect in the final decision of the Registry Court, in particular, with regard to what the transfer of a percentage of participation on the surface right implies, what is involved in the transfer of a similar percentage interest in the parent property and what is actually involved in the intended consolidation of ownership rights and acquired shares.
This article seeks to analyse and criticise Resolution N° 1547-2024-SUNARP-TR in order to evaluate the problems involved in the interpretation of the Registry Court with regard to the consolidation of the definitive property of two sections of exclusive property of an horizontal property regime constituted on a surface building, as a consequence of the acquisition of the property rights over the referred sections of exclusive property, and of the simultaneous acquisition of a shares and rights quota over the respective surface right and of a shares and rights quota over the parent property. For this end, it will be presented the facts of the case from the position of the applicants, from the position of the Registrar who reviewed the case under analysis at first instance and, then, from the final position of the Registry Court. After that, it will be made a presentation of the previous concepts that are necessary to understand in the discussion of this case, among them, the surface right, the horizontal property regimen (in our country under the regimes of exclusive property and common property), and coownership. Finally, it will be made the respective criticism on each relevant aspect in the final decision of the Registry Court, in particular, with regard to what the transfer of a percentage of participation on the surface right implies, what is involved in the transfer of a similar percentage interest in the parent property and what is actually involved in the intended consolidation of ownership rights and acquired shares.
Description
Keywords
Superficies (Derecho)--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Propiedad horizontal--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Derechos reales--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Derecho registral--Jurisprudencia--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