Informe jurídico sobre la Resolución N° 10 del Exp. N° 449- 2019 tramitado ante la Segunda Sala Comercial
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
2024-08-09
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
DOI
Resumen
El problema principal planteado tiene como finalidad evidenciar la importancia
del reclamo expreso previo como requisito de procedencia de las demandas de
anulación de laudo arbitral, salvo excepciones. El Decreto Legislativo N° 1071,
Decreto Legislativo que norma el arbitraje, ha establecido que cuando existan
irregularidades en el marco del arbitraje ya sea en el incumplimiento de las reglas
pactadas por las partes o en aquellas garantías del debido proceso que resulten
aplicables, el interesado tendrá que advertir la existencia de estas afectaciones
buscando que los árbitros reviertan esta situación cuando sea posible. Caso
contrario, la norma señala expresamente que cuando no se haya formulado este
reclamo de manera expresa y oportuna, el laudo arbitral que sea emitido no
podrá ser cuestionado por aquellas afectaciones que no hayan sido advertidas
durante el trámite del arbitraje.
En el presente caso observamos como el demandante solicita la anulación del
laudo arbitral alegando que los árbitros incumplieron las reglas que las partes
habían pactado en el arbitraje. No obstante, hemos demostrado cómo este
reclamo no fue formulado de forma oportuna y, por ende, el demandante toleró
las afectaciones sufridas en el arbitraje. De esta forma, ante la ausencia de un
reclamo expreso previo, la demanda de anulación de laudo arbitral debió ser
desestimada en tanto no se cumplió con un requisito de procedencia establecida
en la normativa nacional que regula el arbitraje.
The main problem raised has as objective to put in evidence the importance of the prior and express claim as a requirement of precedence of the Lawsuits for annulment of arbitral award. The Legislative Decree No. 1071, Legislative Decree that regulates arbitration, has established that when irregularities exist in the context of the arbitration, either in the breach of the rules agreed by the parties or in those guarantees of due process that are applicable, the interested party will have to warn of the existence of these affectations and ask the arbitrators to revert that the arbitrators revert this situation whenever possible. Otherwise, the norm dictates that when there is no reclaim formulated in an express and timely manner, the arbitration decision that is issued may not be challenged by those defects that have not been noticed during the arbitration proceedings. In the present case, we observe how the claimant requests the annulment of the arbitration award alleging that the arbitrators failed to comply with the rules that the parties had agreed upon in the arbitration. However, we have shown how this claim was not formulated on time and, therefore, the claimant tolerated the damages suffered in the arbitration. Thus, in the absence of a prior and express claim, the claim for annulment of the arbitration award should have been dismissed since it did not comply with a procedural requirement established in the national legislation governing arbitration.
The main problem raised has as objective to put in evidence the importance of the prior and express claim as a requirement of precedence of the Lawsuits for annulment of arbitral award. The Legislative Decree No. 1071, Legislative Decree that regulates arbitration, has established that when irregularities exist in the context of the arbitration, either in the breach of the rules agreed by the parties or in those guarantees of due process that are applicable, the interested party will have to warn of the existence of these affectations and ask the arbitrators to revert that the arbitrators revert this situation whenever possible. Otherwise, the norm dictates that when there is no reclaim formulated in an express and timely manner, the arbitration decision that is issued may not be challenged by those defects that have not been noticed during the arbitration proceedings. In the present case, we observe how the claimant requests the annulment of the arbitration award alleging that the arbitrators failed to comply with the rules that the parties had agreed upon in the arbitration. However, we have shown how this claim was not formulated on time and, therefore, the claimant tolerated the damages suffered in the arbitration. Thus, in the absence of a prior and express claim, the claim for annulment of the arbitration award should have been dismissed since it did not comply with a procedural requirement established in the national legislation governing arbitration.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Arbitraje y laudo--Perú, Recurso de anulación--Perú, Debido proceso--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