(Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2024-09-05) Delgado Suárez, Christian
This essay offers a feasible and verifiable theoretical basis for affirming what is called the fourth procedural paradigm, corresponding to the constitutional perspective of the civil procedure or the constitutionalization of it, as an overcoming of its previous classical and instrumentalist stages. To this end, through the interdisciplinary method, the research uses constitutional law, legal interpretation and procedural law to reshape the theoretical bases of the civil process and give it a constitutionalized value through the recognition of fundamental procedural rights as directly applicable norms containing optimization mandates. If it is a question of constitutionalizing the civil procedure, the essay, then, does not only seek the safe passage through the account of the so-called procedural guarantees. On the contrary, the functional or utility method applied to the same imposes that the contribution is to recognize the judge of the Constitutional State the duty of judicial protection even of the same fundamental procedural rights in the face of the defect or absence of rules that should implement and densify the principle of effective jurisdictional protection. This will make it possible to deconstruct and reconstruct concepts such as the fundamental right to effective judicial protection and the right of action, removing from them the slogan of mere guarantees that allow access to jurisdiction, to give them the character of optimization mandates directly executed by judges. It is, then, about the protection of the procedure, within the procedure, by the judge.
(Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2024-09-05) Valenzuela, Gabriella; Cavani, Renzo
This article aims to criticize the so-called “assertion theory” of civil procedure standing to sue, accepted by a significant part of the Peruvian jurisprudence, and consecrated by the Peruvian Civil Procedure Code. The paper seeks to show that this theory should be discarded since it has several conceptual problems, furthermore, it is not capable of giving an account of actual judicial practice when analyzing and deciding on the presence or absence of standing to sue. This becomes more noticeable in the field of judicial enforcement, and, to that extent, an example of corporate spin-off will be given to show that proving the existence of standing to sue concerning enforcement title can be complex, but that is essential for the judge to carry out this analysis.
(Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2024-09-05) Alfaro Valverde, Luis
The data contained in computer and technological devices are increasingly used as evidence in judicial processes, being decisive in the final decisions of judges. This is the so-called computer test. These are often valued uncritically as mere documentary evidence, without considering, among other things, their vulnerable and complex nature. Among the different problems that exist about this test, this study focuses specifically on those related to its reliability. Firstly, the aspects related to the nature of the computer test are examined, as well as its rational assessment. Then, the central question of its reliability is reviewed, related to the risk of its manipulation and its impact on it. Finally, some instruments are analyzed that allow their reliability to be adequately managed, such as expertise, the electronic signature and the intermediation of the notary in the certification of digital evidence.
(Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2024-09-06) Ugarte Mostajo, Daniel
This paper addresses the problem of determining causation between a doctor’s breach of his duty to inform and injuries suffered by the patient as a consequence of the occurrence of uninformed risks. The paper criticizes the application of “hypothetical causality” as an explanatory figure for the causal link and also criticizes the idea of ‘hypothetical informed consent’ as a mechanism to exempt the liability of the defaulting doctor. Finally, the paper argues that the real problem in such case scenarios is not strictly a causation one, yet it has a normative and prudential nature. Accordingly, the solution does not require to establish a patient’s supposed a consent, but to correctly apply objective and subjective attribution criteria.