Acumulación de oficio de procesos civiles con pretensiones conexas que no se encuentran tramitados en un mismo juzgado
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2024
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Nacional de Trujillo
Abstract
Con el presente trabajo de investigación, el autor busca demostrar que la acumulación de procesos con pretensiones conexas constituye uno de los mecanismos procesales más importantes para proteger los derechos de las partes procesales y garantizar que el derecho a la tutela jurisdiccional efectiva sea debidamente respetado durante todas las etapas procesales.
En la actualidad, nuestro Código Procesal Civil permite que la acumulación de los procesos sea realizada a pedido de parte, cuando alguno de los intervinientes lo crean conveniente y necesario, siendo el juez el que decida la procedencia de la acumulación.
Empero, esta investigación se centrará en la facultad que los jueces tienen (o deberían tener) para ordenar la acumulación de procesos de oficio, pues, de acuerdo al Artículo 90° del Código Procesal Civil peruano, esto sólo es posible cuando los procesos se encuentran tramitados ante un mismo juzgado. Ante lo cual, cabría preguntarse ¿es necesario que los jueces también puedan acumular de oficio procesos con pretensiones conexas que se tramiten en distintos juzgados?
La respuesta a esta interrogante permitirá determinar si es que es pertinente o no dotar al juez
de mayores facultades de oficio para procurar que se garantice una adecuada tutela jurisdiccional efectiva, evitando sentencias contradictorias, finalidad máxima de la institución de la acumulación.
With this research work, the author seeks to demonstrate that the accumulation of processes with related claims constitutes one of the most important procedural mechanisms to protect the rights of the procedural parties and guarantee that the right to effective judicial protection is duly respected during all the procedural stages. Currently, our Civil Procedure Code allows the accumulation of processes to be carried out at the request of a party, when one of the parties deems it convenient and necessary, with the judge deciding the origin of the accumulation. However, this investigation will focus on the power that judges have (or should have) to order the accumulation of processes ex officio, since, according to Article 90 of the Peruvian Civil Procedure Code, this is only possible when the processes are processed before the same court. In view of which, one might ask, is it necessary for judges to also be able to accumulate ex officio processes with related claims that are processed in different courts? The answer to this question will make it possible to determine whether or not it is pertinent to provide the judge with greater ex officio powers to ensure that adequate effective judicial protection is guaranteed, avoiding contradictory sentences, the maximum purpose of the institution of accumulation.
With this research work, the author seeks to demonstrate that the accumulation of processes with related claims constitutes one of the most important procedural mechanisms to protect the rights of the procedural parties and guarantee that the right to effective judicial protection is duly respected during all the procedural stages. Currently, our Civil Procedure Code allows the accumulation of processes to be carried out at the request of a party, when one of the parties deems it convenient and necessary, with the judge deciding the origin of the accumulation. However, this investigation will focus on the power that judges have (or should have) to order the accumulation of processes ex officio, since, according to Article 90 of the Peruvian Civil Procedure Code, this is only possible when the processes are processed before the same court. In view of which, one might ask, is it necessary for judges to also be able to accumulate ex officio processes with related claims that are processed in different courts? The answer to this question will make it possible to determine whether or not it is pertinent to provide the judge with greater ex officio powers to ensure that adequate effective judicial protection is guaranteed, avoiding contradictory sentences, the maximum purpose of the institution of accumulation.
Description
Keywords
HUMANITIES and RELIGION::History and philosophy subjects::History subjects::History