Informe jurídico sobre la Resolución N° 0441-2023/SPCINDECOPI C.M.R. vs. Cooperativa Interfinco
Cargando...
Fecha
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
DOI
Acceso al texto completo solo para la Comunidad PUCP
Resumen
En el presente informe jurídico se abordará, como problema jurídico principal, si
la actuación del denunciado habría vulnerado el deber de idoneidad al efectuar
la compensación con cargo a las remuneraciones del denunciante, en virtud de
la falta de pago del préstamo otorgado por este. A fin de brindar luces respecto
de la problemática identificad, se revisará el contenido La Carta de instrucciones
- Descuentos por Planilla de fecha 18 de abril de 2016, así como otros
documentos contractuales pertinentes, con la finalidad de identificar si el c
contenido justificaba por sí solo y de manera clara, suficiente y comprensible la
facultad de compensación por parte del denunciante. Además, se analizará si lo
dispuesto en el artículo 648° del Código Procesal Civil, en lo referido al límite
para la inembargabilidad de las remuneraciones y pensiones era exigible para el
denunciado, antes de realizar la compensación de la deuda. Como problemas
complementarios, se analizará la protección constitucional al derecho de la
remuneración, y qué particularidades existen respecto de la compensación de
acreencias en el caso de las cooperativas no autorizadas a captar ahorros del
público. Finalmente, los instrumentos normativos revisados son el Código de
Protección y Defensa del Consumidor - Ley N° 29571, la Ley General del Sistema
Financiero - Ley N° 26702, la Ley General de Cooperativas – Decreto Supremo
N° 74-90-TR, entre doctrina y jurisprudencia emitida por el Indecopi.
This legal report addresses, as its principal legal issue, whether the respondent’s actions may have violated the duty of suitability (deber de idoneidad) by executing a compensation against the claimant’s remuneration, due to the latter’s failure to repay the loan granted. In order to shed light on the identified legal problem, the content of the Letter of Instructions – Payroll Deductions, dated April 18, 2016, as well as other relevant contractual documents, will be reviewed to determine whether said content, by itself, clearly, sufficiently, and understandably justified the claimant’s authority to apply such compensation. Furthermore, this report analyzes whether the provisions of Article 648 of the Code of Civil Procedure— regarding the limitations on the garnishment of salaries and pensions—were binding upon the respondent prior to executing the debt compensation. As secondary issues, the report also examines the constitutional protection of the right to remuneration, as well as the particularities surrounding the compensation of claims in the context of cooperatives that are not authorized to collect deposits from the public. Finally, the legal instruments reviewed include the Consumer Protection and Defense Code – Law No. 29571, the General Law of the Financial System – Law No. 26702, the General Law on Cooperatives – Supreme Decree No. 074-90-TR, along with relevant legal doctrine and case law issued by INDECOPI.
This legal report addresses, as its principal legal issue, whether the respondent’s actions may have violated the duty of suitability (deber de idoneidad) by executing a compensation against the claimant’s remuneration, due to the latter’s failure to repay the loan granted. In order to shed light on the identified legal problem, the content of the Letter of Instructions – Payroll Deductions, dated April 18, 2016, as well as other relevant contractual documents, will be reviewed to determine whether said content, by itself, clearly, sufficiently, and understandably justified the claimant’s authority to apply such compensation. Furthermore, this report analyzes whether the provisions of Article 648 of the Code of Civil Procedure— regarding the limitations on the garnishment of salaries and pensions—were binding upon the respondent prior to executing the debt compensation. As secondary issues, the report also examines the constitutional protection of the right to remuneration, as well as the particularities surrounding the compensation of claims in the context of cooperatives that are not authorized to collect deposits from the public. Finally, the legal instruments reviewed include the Consumer Protection and Defense Code – Law No. 29571, the General Law of the Financial System – Law No. 26702, the General Law on Cooperatives – Supreme Decree No. 074-90-TR, along with relevant legal doctrine and case law issued by INDECOPI.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Instituto Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia y de la Protección de la Propiedad Intelectual (Perú), Bancos cooperativos--Perú, Préstamos--Perú, Protección del consumidor--Perú
Citación
Colecciones
item.page.endorsement
item.page.review
item.page.supplemented
item.page.referenced
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este artículo se describe como info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

