Delimitation of jurisdiction between the contentious-administrative judge and other judges of the Republic through jurisprudence: the Peruvian case

Abstract

The author of this essay proceeds to analyze the various pronouncements of the Peruvian Judiciary contained not only in second-degree sentences but also in full jurisdictional sessions as well as in cassations through which, in the practical scenario of jurisprudence, the jurisdiction of the contentious-administrative judge before other judges, such as civil or labor, in matters related to administrative actions of administrative law as well as those administrative actions of private law generated by organizations that exceptionally perform administrative functions or provide public services to the the same as those that combine administrative actions of administrative law with other types of actions of individuals under a regulation other than that of administrative law that do not always allow the competent judge to be identified, clearly, to subject the administration to sufficient judicial control; in this order of ideas, it stops to analyze the current role that has been generated as a product of the transformation of Administrative Law based on the figure of the flight of said discipline towards a scenario of depublication and its impact on administrative actions susceptible to be subjected to contentious-administrative as a judicial process, showing a critical judgment regarding the dissimilar position of the Courts as well as proposing some ideas with the purpose of improving this scenario of uncertainty in the determination of the natural judge in a delicate procedural matter where the individual must be protected from the attacks of the administration as a public power.