La reprogramación de audiencias, por inasitencias de las partes como causa de la duración irrazonable del proceso laboral.
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2021
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Nacional de Trujillo
Abstract
En el proceso laboral, a diferencia de lo que ocurre en el proceso civil, el legislador ha regulado la posibilidad de la reprogramación de las audiencias (de conciliación o juzgamiento) cuando esta se ha frustrado por inconcurrencia de las partes, siempre que el pedido de reprogramación se realice dentro del plazo de 30 días naturales (artículo 43.1 y 44 de la Ley N° 29497). El proceso solo se archiva si es que no se solicita la reprogramación de la audiencia o cuando seinasiste por segunda vez (artículo 30 de la Ley N° 20497). Sin embargo, la posibilidad de la reprogramación de las audiencias, ha conllevado a que las partes inasistan de manera injustificada, ocasionándose así una dilación del proceso. La presente investigación tiene por objeto determinar si la reprogramación de las audiencias por inasistencia de las partes, afecta el derecho a la duración razonable del proceso. Con esta finalidad hemos procedido a la revisión de expedientes judiciales en la vía de proceso ordinario tramitados con la Ley N° 29497 – Nueva Ley Procesal de Trabajo, en la ciudad de Trujillo, correspondientes al año 2017. Lo que hemos advertido de la revisión de dichos expedientes es que en más del 90% de los casos, no está acreditada la existencia de una causa que verdaderamente justifique la inasistencia de las partes a la audiencia. En gran parte de dicho porcentaje, las partes solo se remiten a lo prescrito en la Ley, sin alegar justificación alguna, para solicitar la reprogramación de la audiencia frustrada. Las conclusiones evidencian que, en efecto, la reprogramación de las audiencias por inasistencia de las partes sí afecta el derecho a la duración razonable del proceso, porque en los expedientes tramitados en los juzgados laborales de la ciudad de Trujillo en el año 2017,dichas inasistencias fueron casi en su totalidad injustificadas, lo que generó una dilación indebida del proceso. Finalmente, se proponen algunas recomendaciones para evitar frustraciones injustificadas de las audiencias y, por ende, evitar dilaciones indebidas de los procesos laborales, atribuibles a las partes.
ABSTRACT In the labor process, unlike what happens in the civil process, the legislator has regulated the possibility of rescheduling hearings (conciliation or trial) when it has been frustrated due to the parties' inconsistency, provided that the request for rescheduling is carried out within 30 calendar days (article 43.1 and 44 of Law No. 29497). The process is only archived if the rescheduling of the hearing is not requested or when a second time is absent (Article 30 of Law No. 20497). However, the possibility of rescheduling the hearings has led the parties to unreasonably absent, thus causing a delay in the process. The purpose of this investigation is to determine whether the rescheduling of hearings due to the absence of the parties affects the right to a reasonable duration of the process. For this purpose, we have proceeded to the review of judicial files processed with Law No. 29497 - New Labor Procedure Law, in the city of Trujillo, corresponding to the year 2017. What we have warned of the review of said files is that in more In 90% of the cases, the existence of a cause that truly justifies the nonattendance of the parties to the hearing is not proven. In a large part of this percentage, the parties only refer to what is prescribed in the Law, without claiming any justification, to request the rescheduling of the frustrated hearing.The conclusions show that, in effect, the rescheduling of hearings due to nonattendance of the parties does affect the right to a reasonable duration of the process, because in the files processed in the labor courts of the city of Trujillo in 2017, said absences they were almost entirely unjustified, which led to undue delay in the process. Finally, some recommendations are proposed to avoid unjustified frustrations of the hearings and, therefore, to avoid undue delays in labor processes, attributable to the parties.
ABSTRACT In the labor process, unlike what happens in the civil process, the legislator has regulated the possibility of rescheduling hearings (conciliation or trial) when it has been frustrated due to the parties' inconsistency, provided that the request for rescheduling is carried out within 30 calendar days (article 43.1 and 44 of Law No. 29497). The process is only archived if the rescheduling of the hearing is not requested or when a second time is absent (Article 30 of Law No. 20497). However, the possibility of rescheduling the hearings has led the parties to unreasonably absent, thus causing a delay in the process. The purpose of this investigation is to determine whether the rescheduling of hearings due to the absence of the parties affects the right to a reasonable duration of the process. For this purpose, we have proceeded to the review of judicial files processed with Law No. 29497 - New Labor Procedure Law, in the city of Trujillo, corresponding to the year 2017. What we have warned of the review of said files is that in more In 90% of the cases, the existence of a cause that truly justifies the nonattendance of the parties to the hearing is not proven. In a large part of this percentage, the parties only refer to what is prescribed in the Law, without claiming any justification, to request the rescheduling of the frustrated hearing.The conclusions show that, in effect, the rescheduling of hearings due to nonattendance of the parties does affect the right to a reasonable duration of the process, because in the files processed in the labor courts of the city of Trujillo in 2017, said absences they were almost entirely unjustified, which led to undue delay in the process. Finally, some recommendations are proposed to avoid unjustified frustrations of the hearings and, therefore, to avoid undue delays in labor processes, attributable to the parties.
Description
Keywords
Plazo razonable, Audiencias, Proceso laboral