Informe jurídico sobre la Resolución N° 196- 2023/SPC-INDECOPI
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
2024-08-12
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
DOI
Resumen
El presente informe jurídico versa sobre el análisis de la Resolución N° 00196-
2023/SPC-INDECOPI, a través de la cual la Sala Especializada en Protección al
Consumidor emitió un pronunciamiento sobre el fondo del asunto revocando la
decisión de primera instancia que había declarado fundada la denuncia, en
consecuencia declaró infundada la misma por una presunta infracción al deber
de idoneidad en tanto que el proveedor denunciado no incrementó de forma
injustificada la deuda que el denunciante mantenía con su representada.
Asimismo, durante el procedimiento se dieron circunstancias que pueden ser
analizadas desde el punto de vista del Derecho Administrativo Sancionador tales
como las figuras del allanamiento, medidas correctivas, nulidad de oficio, etc.
Finalmente, si bien no fue materia de pronunciamiento por la Sala, se analizará
si el denunciante calificaba para gozar del beneficio establecido en la Ley Nº
31050.
This legal report deals with the analysis of Resolution No. 00196-2023/SPCINDECOPI, through which the Specialized Consumer Protection Chamber issued a ruling on the merits of the matter revoking the first instance decision that had declared the complaint was founded, consequently it was declared unfounded due to an alleged complaint of the duty of suitability as long as the reported supplier did not unjustifiably increase the debt that the complainant maintained with its client. Likewise, during the procedure, circumstances arose that can be analyzed from the point of view of Administrative Sanction Law, such as the figures of the search, corrective measures, ex officio nullity, etc. Finally, although it was not the subject of a ruling by the Chamber, it will be analyzed whether the complainant qualified to enjoy the benefit established in Law No. 31050.
This legal report deals with the analysis of Resolution No. 00196-2023/SPCINDECOPI, through which the Specialized Consumer Protection Chamber issued a ruling on the merits of the matter revoking the first instance decision that had declared the complaint was founded, consequently it was declared unfounded due to an alleged complaint of the duty of suitability as long as the reported supplier did not unjustifiably increase the debt that the complainant maintained with its client. Likewise, during the procedure, circumstances arose that can be analyzed from the point of view of Administrative Sanction Law, such as the figures of the search, corrective measures, ex officio nullity, etc. Finally, although it was not the subject of a ruling by the Chamber, it will be analyzed whether the complainant qualified to enjoy the benefit established in Law No. 31050.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Protección del consumidor--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Derecho administrativo--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Sanciones administrativas--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Procedimiento administrativo--Jurisprudencia--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