Defenselessness and procedural overload in the New Procedural Labor Act
Abstract
This work tries to make an analysis regarding the problems detected in the application of the New Procedural Labor Act, as well as to contribute to one of the most important objectives of the labor procedural reform process, efficiency in the system. The fact of accepting that only exceptionally precisions or clarifications can be made regarding a claim, as long as it does not substantially alter it, has established a bad practice, because, under this argument, the litigants continue to modify their claim in labor matters; then, some courts reject it, in obviously inappropriate cases, while other courts accept it. Now, while it is true that there are still lawyers who do not adequately comply with a responsible and diligent practice at the time of filing the lawsuit, this can be solved with uniform criteria in each judicial district to avoid procedural overload and issue resolutions under the argument of application of the principles.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Carocca, A. (1998). Garantía constitucional de la defensa procesal. Barcelona: José María Bosch.
Congreso Constituyente Democrático (1993). Constitución Política del Perú. Lima: 31 de octubre de 1993.
Diario Oficial El Peruano (15 de enero de 2010). Ley n.o 29497. Nueva Ley Procesal del Trabajo. Diario Oficial El Peruano [Separata], número 10861.
Giugale, M. et al. (2006). Perú. La oportunidad de un país diferente: próspero, equitativo y gobernable. Washington: Banco Mundial. Recuperado de https://www.mef.gob.pe/contenidos/pol_econ/documentos/BM_Peru_un_pais_ diferente.pdf
Gutiérrez, W. (dir.). (2015). La justicia en el Perú. Cinco grandes problemas. Documento preliminar 2014-2015. Lima: Gaceta Jurídica. Recuperado de http://www.gacetajuridica.com.pe/laley-adjuntos/INFORME-LA-JUSTICIA-EN-EL-PERU.pdf
Mesía, C. (2004). Exégesis del Código Procesal Constitucional. Lima: Gaceta Jurídica.
Moreno, V. (2010). Sobre el derecho de defensa. Teoría y Derecho. Revista de Pensamiento Jurídico, (8), 17-40.
Novak, F. y Namihas, S. (2004). Derecho internacional de los derechos humanos. Manual para magistrados y auxiliares de justicia. Lima: Academia de la Magistratura.
Poder Judicial (2013). Pleno Jurisdiccional Nacional Laboral. Lima: 13 y 14 de septiembre de 2013.
Poder Judicial (2017). VI Pleno Jurisdiccional Supremo en Materia Laboral y Previsional. Lima: 18 de septiembre y 2 de octubre de 2017.
Poder Judicial (2019). Expediente n.o 03919-2017-0-1601-JR-LA-09. Corte Superior de Justicia de La Libertad. Segunda Sala Especializada Laboral. Trujillo: 7 de junio de 2019.
Tribunal Constitucional (2003). Expediente n.o 1941-2002-AA/TC. Lima: 27 de enero de 2003. Recuperado de https://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2003/01941-2002-AA.html
Tribunal Constitucional (2005). Expediente n.o 3997-2005-PC/TC ICA. Lima: 12 de agosto de 2005. Recuperado de http://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2006/03997-2005-AC%20Resolucion.pdf
Tribunal Constitucional (2006). Expediente n.o 0582-2006-PA/TC. Lima: 13 de marzo de 2006. Recuperado de https://tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2006/00582-2006-AA%20Resolucion.pdf
Tribunal Constitucional (2007). Expediente n.o 5085-2006-PA/TC. Lima: 13 de abril de 2007. Recuperado de https://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2007/05085-2006-AA.pdf
Tribunal Constitucional (2013). Expediente n.o 1147-2012-PA/TC. Lima: 16 de enero de 2013. Recuperado de https://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2013/01147-2012-AA.html
Tribunal Constitucional (2017). Expediente n.o 03571-2015-PH/TC242. Lima: 4 de julio de 2017. Recuperado de https://tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2018/03571-2015-HC.pdf
Copyright (c) 2020 The Review of Procedural Labor Law
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain their copyrights and register under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which allows them to use what is published (adapt - remix, transform and build - and share - copy and redistribute - the material in any medium or format).
1. The journal allows authors to retain their copyrights of submitted articles without any restrictions.
2. Authors retain the right to share, distribute, copy, perform and publicly communicate the article published in the Revista de Derecho Procesal del Trabajo (e.g., place it in an institutional repository).
3. Authors retain the right to make a subsequent publication of their work, to use the article or any part of it (e.g., a compilation of their work, notes for conferences, thesis, or for a book), provided they indicate the source of publication (authors of the work, journal, volume, number and date).
