Informe jurídico sobre la Resolución N° 5175-2023-SUNARP-TR (NSIR-T)
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 Tribunal Registral concluyó que no corresponde inscribir hipoteca legal,
cuando, a pesar de no incluir una cláusula de renuncia expresa en el contrato,
las partes han acordado que el saldo del precio está garantizado por una
hipoteca convencional. Esto fue en base a un criterio interpretativo de los
artículos 1354 y 1099 del Código Civil. Por ello, el presente informe abarca el
análisis de dicho pronunciamiento en relación al alcance de las facultades del
Tribunal Registral y la necesidad de la cláusula de renuncia expresa a la hipoteca
legal.
Si bien el Tribunal Registral facilitó la inscripción del acto de compraventa y de
la hipoteca convencional, su análisis debió ser riguroso, bajo los límites legales
vigentes, unificando criterios en aras de la seguridad jurídica. Esto es debido a
que la calificación registral, regulada en el artículo 2011 del Código Civil y el
artículo 32 del Reglamento General de Registros Públicos, abarca la legalidad
de los documentos, capacidad de los otorgantes, validez del acto, su
compatibilidad con el Registro, teniendo en cuenta el carácter inscribible del acto.
Además, debe de realizarse dentro del marco de sus competencias contenidas
en la Ley 26366.
Así, existirá un pronunciamiento bajo una relación concreta y directa de los
hechos relevantes del caso, no creando un criterio de interpretación (subjetivo)
respecto de artículos contenidos en la normativa peruana vigente. De lo
contrario, se generarán pronunciamientos contradictorios que oscurezcan una
misma situación que ha sido resuelta de distintas maneras.
The Registry Court concluded that it is not appropriate to register a legal mortgage when, despite not including an express waiver clause in the contract, the parties have agreed that the balance of the price is guaranteed by a conventional mortgage. This was based on an interpretative criterion of articles 1354 and 1099 of the Civil Code. Therefore, the present report covers the analysis of such pronouncement in relation to the scope of the Court's powers and the need for the express waiver clause of the legal mortgage. Although the Registry Court facilitated the registration of the act of sale and purchase and of the conventional mortgage, its analysis should have been rigorous, under the legal limits in force, unifying criteria for the sake of legal certainty. This is due to the fact that the registry qualification, regulated in article 2011 of the Civil Code and article 32 of the General Regulations of Public Registries, covers the legality of the documents, capacity of the grantors, validity of the act, its compatibility with the Registry, taking into account the registrable nature of the act. In addition, it must be carried out within the framework of its competencies contained in the Law of Creation of the National System of Public Registries. Thus, there will be a pronouncement under a concrete and direct relation of the relevant facts of the case, not creating a criterion of interpretation (subjective) with respect to articles contained in the Peruvian regulations in force. Otherwise, contradictory pronouncements will be generated, obscuring the same situation that has been resolved in different ways.
The Registry Court concluded that it is not appropriate to register a legal mortgage when, despite not including an express waiver clause in the contract, the parties have agreed that the balance of the price is guaranteed by a conventional mortgage. This was based on an interpretative criterion of articles 1354 and 1099 of the Civil Code. Therefore, the present report covers the analysis of such pronouncement in relation to the scope of the Court's powers and the need for the express waiver clause of the legal mortgage. Although the Registry Court facilitated the registration of the act of sale and purchase and of the conventional mortgage, its analysis should have been rigorous, under the legal limits in force, unifying criteria for the sake of legal certainty. This is due to the fact that the registry qualification, regulated in article 2011 of the Civil Code and article 32 of the General Regulations of Public Registries, covers the legality of the documents, capacity of the grantors, validity of the act, its compatibility with the Registry, taking into account the registrable nature of the act. In addition, it must be carried out within the framework of its competencies contained in the Law of Creation of the National System of Public Registries. Thus, there will be a pronouncement under a concrete and direct relation of the relevant facts of the case, not creating a criterion of interpretation (subjective) with respect to articles contained in the Peruvian regulations in force. Otherwise, contradictory pronouncements will be generated, obscuring the same situation that has been resolved in different ways.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Derecho registral--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Hipotecas--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Derecho--Interpretación
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