Informe Jurídico sobre Casación N° 1002-2018 LIMA
Date
2023-08-01
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
El presente trabajo tiene como finalidad analizar los problemas jurídicos de la
casación N° 1002-2018 Lima, sobre nulidad de acto jurídico, sentencia de
casación emitida por la Sala Civil Permanente de la Corte Suprema de Justicia.
Dicho análisis tendrá en cuenta la controversia suscitada entre las partes
procesales del proceso de nulidad de acto jurídico, la demandante Victoria
América Millares Heredia, en calidad de heredera de Teodicia Auristela Heredia
Peralta y el demandado Miguel Ángel Franco Motta. El acto jurídico que se
cuestiona en dicho proceso es el contrato de compraventa y cesión de usufructo
celebrado celebrado entre Teodicia Auristela Heredia Peralta y Miguel Ángel
Franco Motta.
El problema principal del presente informe es analizar si fue correcto el fallo de
la Corte Suprema al declarar que existió una vulneración al debido proceso por
parte de las intancias previas debido a que estas concluyeron que la vendedora
tenía discernimiento al suscribir el contrato de compraventa y cesión de usufructo
de fecha 04 de setiembre de 2001. Para resolver dicho problema principal es
necesario analizar si se presentaron vulneraciones al derecho a la prueba y al
derecho a la motivación de las resoluciones judiciales de la demandante en las
sentencias de primera y segunda instancia; por otro lado, las herramientas
normativas principales utilizadas para resolver dichos problemas serán el X
Pleno Casatorio Civil, la Constitución y el Código Procesal Civil.
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the legal problems of appeal No. 1002- 2018 Lima, on the nullity of a legal act, an appeal judgment issued by the Permanent Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice. Said analysis will take into account the dispute between the procedural parties of the legal act annulment process, the plaintiff Victoria América Millares Heredia, as heiress of Teodicia Auristela Heredia Peralta and the defendant Miguel Ángel Franco Motta. The legal act that is questioned in said process is the contract of sale and assignment of usufruct entered into between Teodicia Auristela Heredia Peralta and Miguel Ángel Franco Motta. The main problem of this report is to analyze whether the ruling of the Supreme Court was correct in declaring that there was a violation of due process by the previous instances because they concluded that the seller had discernment when signing the purchase, sale and assignment contract. of usufruct dated September 4, 2001. In order to resolve said main problem, it is necessary to analyze whether there were violations of the right to evidence and the right to reason of the judicial decisions of the plaintiff in the judgments of first and second instance; on the other hand, the main normative tools used to solve these problems will be the X Plenary Civil Cassation, the Constitution and the Civil Procedure Code.
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the legal problems of appeal No. 1002- 2018 Lima, on the nullity of a legal act, an appeal judgment issued by the Permanent Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice. Said analysis will take into account the dispute between the procedural parties of the legal act annulment process, the plaintiff Victoria América Millares Heredia, as heiress of Teodicia Auristela Heredia Peralta and the defendant Miguel Ángel Franco Motta. The legal act that is questioned in said process is the contract of sale and assignment of usufruct entered into between Teodicia Auristela Heredia Peralta and Miguel Ángel Franco Motta. The main problem of this report is to analyze whether the ruling of the Supreme Court was correct in declaring that there was a violation of due process by the previous instances because they concluded that the seller had discernment when signing the purchase, sale and assignment contract. of usufruct dated September 4, 2001. In order to resolve said main problem, it is necessary to analyze whether there were violations of the right to evidence and the right to reason of the judicial decisions of the plaintiff in the judgments of first and second instance; on the other hand, the main normative tools used to solve these problems will be the X Plenary Civil Cassation, the Constitution and the Civil Procedure Code.
Description
Keywords
Derecho procesal civil--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Debido proceso--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Prueba (Derecho)--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Derecho constitucional--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Derecho--Interpretación--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