Contiene el presente Informe, el análisis de la resolución N°8
recaída en el expediente N°71-2016-0-1817-SP-CO-02 emitido por la Primera
Sala Civil Subespecialidad Comercial de la Corte Superior de Justicia de Lima,
la cual versa sobre la demanda de anulación arbitral que interpone el Consorcio
Nueva Gambetta contra el Laudo arbitral de derecho emitido por el tribunal
arbitral de la Cámara de Comercio de Lima en el proceso arbitral seguido contra
el Gobierno Regional del Callao.
En el presente informe se aborda temas como la debida motivación, el derecho
a la defensa y debido proceso, la jurisdiccional del arbitraje y la anulación de
laudo arbitral. Dichos temas en conjunto nos han ayudado a conocer y demostrar
si es válido tomar en cuenta alegaciones no invocadas por las partes como parte
de la motivación del laudo arbitral; como fue vulnerado el derecho a la defensa y
el debido proceso en la Resolución en cuestión; y si correspondía declarar
fundada la solicitud de anulación de Laudo del Expediente materia del Informe.
El informe se basa en la vulneración del Articulo 63, inciso b). producto de la
aplicación de dos descuentos al monto del pago de costos directos otorgados
por el tribunal arbitral, descuentos que no formaron parte del debate procesal.
Finalmente se concluye, que la parte afectada no tuvo oportunidad de ejercer su
derecho a la defensa y debido proceso en cuanto no pudieron expresar lo
conveniente a su derecho, por lo que debió declararse fundada la demanda de
anulación de laudo arbitral. / This report contains the analysis of resolution N° 8 issued by the
First Civil Chamber of Commercial Sub-specialization of the Superior Court of
Justice of Lima in case N°71-2016 -0- 1817-SP -CO-02, which concerns the claim
for the annulment of the arbitration award filed by Consorcio Nueva Gambetta
against the arbitration award issued by the arbitration tribunal of the Lima
Chamber of Commerce in the arbitration proceeding against the Regional
Government of Callao.
This report addresses issues such as due motivation, the right to defense and
due process, arbitration jurisdiction and annulment of the arbitration award.
These topics together have helped us to understand and demonstrate whether it
is valid to consider allegations not invoked by the parties as part of the motivation
of the arbitration award; how the right to defense and due process have been
violated in the Resolution in question; and whether it was appropriate to declare
the request for annulment of the Award in the case file subject to this Report as
well-founded. The report is based on the violation of Article 63, subsection b),
resulting from the application of two deductions to the payment amount of direct
costs granted by the arbitral tribunal, deductions which were not part of the
procedural debate. Finally, it is concluded that the affected party did not have the
opportunity to exercise its right to defense and due process as they were not able
to express what was convenient to their rights, and therefore the claim for
annulment of the arbitral award should have been declared well-founded.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:PUCP/oai:tesis.pucp.edu.pe:20.500.12404/28390 |
| Date | 31 July 2024 |
| Creators | Olarte Vallejos, Adriana Andrea |
| Contributors | Chocano Davis, Christian César |
| Publisher | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, PE |
| Source Sets | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
| Language | Spanish |
| Detected Language | Spanish |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis |
| Format | application/pdf, application/pdf, application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/pe/ |
Page generated in 0.0023 seconds