Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución N°00026-2020-TSC/OSIPTEL (Expediente N°008-2018-CCO-ST/CI)
Date
2023-08-02
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Acceso al texto completo solo para la Comunidad PUCP
Abstract
El presente informe analiza los principales problemas jurídicos presentes en la
tramitación del procedimiento administrativo trilateral seguido por Azteca contra Enel a
cargo de los órganos de solución de controversias de OSIPTEL, recaído en el
Expediente N°008-2018-CCO-ST/CI, donde se discute la devolución de supuestos
montos cobrados por la empresa eléctrica que superaron el precio máximo legal
establecido para el concepto de la contraprestación periódica por acceso y uso de
infraestructura eléctrica, concepto regulado en la fórmula reglamentaria establecida
bajo el Ley de Banda Ancha. Inicialmente, se analiza la competencia del Cuerpo
Colegiado Ad Hoc para resolver las pretensiones de Azteca, en contraposición de lo
resuelvo en Laudos Arbitrales emitidos en paralelo, que declaran su propia
competencia. En la segunda parte, se analiza la cuestión de fondo de la controversia,
que implica tomar posición respecto a la correcta interpretación de la fórmula
reglamentaria que determina el monto de la contraprestación periódica antes referida.
Asimismo, el presente informe está enfocado, desde una perspectiva práctica, en
establecer un panorama general sobre la situación de las quince (15) reclamaciones
similares interpuestas por Azteca y así poner de manifiesto los distintos criterios
utilizados por los operadores jurídicos para resolver esta controversia.
This report analyzes the main legal problems present in the processing of the trilateral administrative procedure (PAT) followed by Azteca against Enel in charge of the dispute resolution organs of OSIPTEL, filed in Case N°008-2018-CCO-ST/CI, where the refund of alleged amounts charged by the electric company that exceeded the maximum legal price established for the concept of the periodic consideration for access and use of electric infrastructure, a concept regulated in the regulatory formula established in the Broadband Law Regulation, is discussed. Initially, the competence of the Ad Hoc Collegiate Body to resolve Azteca's claims is analyzed, as opposed to what was resolved in Arbitral Awards issued in parallel, which declare its own competence. The second part of the report analyzes the merits of the dispute, which involves taking a position on the correct interpretation of the regulatory formula that determines the amount of the periodic consideration referred to above. Likewise, this report is focused, from a practical perspective, on establishing an overview of the situation of the fifteen (15) similar claims filed by Azteca and thus highlighting the different criteria used by the legal operators to resolve this controversy.
This report analyzes the main legal problems present in the processing of the trilateral administrative procedure (PAT) followed by Azteca against Enel in charge of the dispute resolution organs of OSIPTEL, filed in Case N°008-2018-CCO-ST/CI, where the refund of alleged amounts charged by the electric company that exceeded the maximum legal price established for the concept of the periodic consideration for access and use of electric infrastructure, a concept regulated in the regulatory formula established in the Broadband Law Regulation, is discussed. Initially, the competence of the Ad Hoc Collegiate Body to resolve Azteca's claims is analyzed, as opposed to what was resolved in Arbitral Awards issued in parallel, which declare its own competence. The second part of the report analyzes the merits of the dispute, which involves taking a position on the correct interpretation of the regulatory formula that determines the amount of the periodic consideration referred to above. Likewise, this report is focused, from a practical perspective, on establishing an overview of the situation of the fifteen (15) similar claims filed by Azteca and thus highlighting the different criteria used by the legal operators to resolve this controversy.
Description
Keywords
Arbitraje y laudo--Legislación--Perú, Actos administrativos--Legislación--Perú, Empresas eléctricas--Legislación--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