Clarification and correction of judgments
Effective judicial protection and due process of law are fundamental rights which are collected by the State Political Constitution. This means, that any person has the right to have justice done when it goes to court through a process, where we provide a set of rights and guarantees in its developm...
| Autor Principal: | Morales Godo, Juan |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Idioma: | spa |
| Publicado: |
2014
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: |
http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechoprocesal/article/view/10371/10823 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: |
Effective judicial protection and due process of law are fundamental rights which are collected by the State Political Constitution. This means, that any person has the right to have justice done when it goes to court through a process, where we provide a set of rights and guarantees in its development, and that the decision is effective. Within the content of due process has the plurality of instances, which is accessed through the impugned resources that afforded us by the procedural system.The parties may request, or the court of its own motion may clarify the obscure concepts or correct material errors, numerical and spelling mistakes that may exist in the decisions they make. Similarly, the parties may ask the judge to complete (integrated) resolution in respect of controversial issues unresolved in the judgment.Our Civil Procedure Code regulates the issue of clarification, through two specific items: 406 and 407. The first regulates the clarification itself, and the second, the correction of judicial decisions. The clarification contains only one supposed, and is related to the presence of some obscure or dubious concept. While correcting of judicial decision includes: materials, numerical, spelling and also the possibility of complete resolution with a controversial issue unresolved errors in judgment.The deadlines for clarification and correction of judicial decisions are the same to file impugned resources. As such, it may not restrict the fundamental right of the defendant to use another instance to review the judicial decision, whether clarification or correction thereof is pending. The reasonable and sensible, to assert the right to file impugned resources is made within the framework of freedom, security and full knowledge of the judgment to be questioned, is that first the clarification and correction are resolved. In that sense, the deadline for filing the appeal should run from the date of notification of the decision or denies access and correction requested clarification.The arguments used to justify a decision regarding the deadline for filing the appeal in court seat, are perfectly valid to justify the same solution in the case of administrative decisions and arbitral awards. Accompanied by our Arbitration Law, Legislative Decree No. 1071, Article 58, that expressly regulates the issue of clarification and correction of arbitral award, establishing time limits applicable to answer them and to the arbitral tribunal to resolve them. And in Article 64, when it refers to the annulment process, says that the action for annulment brought before the competent Superior Court within twenty (20) days following the notification of the award days. When is sought rectification, interpretation, integration or exclusion of the award had been made or initiated by the arbitral tribunal, the appeal must be filed within twenty (20) days of notification of the final decision on these issues, or the expiration of the term to solve without the arbitral tribunal has ruled. |
|---|