La prueba de la acreditación de la Responsabilidad Solidaria del Administrador de Hecho
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2025
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Nacional de Trujillo
Abstract
El objetivo de la investigación fue analizar la norma sobre la acreditación de la Responsabilidad Solidaria del Administrador de Hecho. En cuanto a la metodología, su diseño fue no experimental con una muestra de cuatro (4) abogados especialistas en la materia sobre la acreditación de la Responsabilidad Solidaria del Administrador de Hecho. Respecto a la técnica se utilizó la entrevista y como instrumento la guía de entrevista, documentación tal es el caso de las jurisprudencias. Con los métodos analítico y fenomenológico, se encontraron los resultados, que muestran que los entrevistados coinciden en que el Administrador de Hecho opera en una zona gris legal, esto se debe a que su reconocimiento formal y legal son inciertos; de otro lado, en el Perú, no está plenamente desarrollado en la legislación societaria, complicando la atribución de responsabilidades; asimismo, la falta de formalización del Administrador de Hecho obstaculiza la validación de sus acciones, se presta para la ambigüedad en su rol complicando la atribución de responsabilidades tanto el ámbito civil, penal y tributario, generando conflictos en la organización, con terceros y ante el fisco.
The objective of the research was to analyze the standard on the accreditation of the Solidarity Liability of the administrator of Fact. Regarding the methodology, its design was non-experimental with a sample of six (6) lawyers specializing in the matter on the accreditation of the Solidarity Liability of the administrator In fact. Regarding the technique the interview was used as a technique and the interview guide as an instrument, documentation such as the case of jurisprudence. With the analytical and phenomenological method, finding the results, which show that the interviewees agree that the administrator in fact operates a legal gray zone, this is due to their formal and legal recognition being uncertain, on the other hand, in Peru they are not fully developed in corporate legislation, complicating the attribution of responsibilities, on the other hand that the Lack of formalization of the administrator in fact hindering the validation of his actions, leads to ambiguity in his role, complicating the attribution of responsibilities both in the civil, criminal and tax spheres, generating conflicts in the organization with third parties and the treasury.
The objective of the research was to analyze the standard on the accreditation of the Solidarity Liability of the administrator of Fact. Regarding the methodology, its design was non-experimental with a sample of six (6) lawyers specializing in the matter on the accreditation of the Solidarity Liability of the administrator In fact. Regarding the technique the interview was used as a technique and the interview guide as an instrument, documentation such as the case of jurisprudence. With the analytical and phenomenological method, finding the results, which show that the interviewees agree that the administrator in fact operates a legal gray zone, this is due to their formal and legal recognition being uncertain, on the other hand, in Peru they are not fully developed in corporate legislation, complicating the attribution of responsibilities, on the other hand that the Lack of formalization of the administrator in fact hindering the validation of his actions, leads to ambiguity in his role, complicating the attribution of responsibilities both in the civil, criminal and tax spheres, generating conflicts in the organization with third parties and the treasury.
Description
Keywords
Responsabilidad solidaria, Zona gris legal, Legislación societaria, Atribución de responsabilidades y formalización del administrador