Why Is My Iphone Not Playing Xepisodes?

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE EVENTS

Such

which reads Operational Plan 2010-II, Legal Research Center Iuris Veritatis, organizes and invites the academic event, seminar, entitled "IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE OF PTOTECCIÓN and consumer protection, to take place on 03, 04 and November 5 from 15:00 in the Auditorium of the William Morris UCSM.

Whipple's Disease More Condition_symptoms

THE CIVIL CODE OF 1936 AND THE CIVIL CODE OF 1984 "ANALYSIS OF THE TRANSITION OF LIABILITY LIABILITY nonperformance"

The Civil Code of 1984 introduced two important changes with reference to the scheme of the Code of 1936. The rules on mora-contained by the Code of 1936 between the provisions of the pay-and the rules on the penalty clause, legislated by the previous code as one of the modalities of obligations, were incorporated into the Code of 1984 in the section on non-performance of obligations because both institutions are designed to operate in cases of nonperformance or partial performance, late or defective obligation. Accordingly, the title of non-performance of obligations in the current code has three chapters on general provisions, arrears and obligations with a penalty clause, unlike the previous Code of 1936, with one title, the provisions dealing general.

So much for the scheme. Now discuss some of the innovations introduced by the Civil Code, regarding failure to comply with the obligations regarding the regulation of its immediate predecessor, the Code 1936.

1. NO FAULT AND ACTS OF GOD OR FORCE MAJEURE

The Civil Code of 1936 made no distinction between the absence of guilt, this is the no fault, and fortuitous event or force majeure, and only allowed the debtor to attend a defense for any of these last two events. The Code of 1984, however, the rule is that the debtor is legally immune if necessary with ordinary diligence required, that is, with no guilt and, additionally, acts of God or force majeure, in which there absence of guilt, and the latter because in certain situations the law or contract provide that the debtor can only be exempted from liability for those acts of God or force majeure, and not by diligent action however does not allow you to meet the obligation .

The new Code difference, hence the absence of fault or no fault, as a generic concept of fortuitous events or force majeure, which are specific concepts of no fault.

In the absence of fault of the debtor is not required to prove the positive fact of unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure, that is, the cause of failure due to events caused by extraordinary, unpredictable and inevitable. In the absence of fault by the debtor is simply required to prove that he acted with ordinary diligence required, without having to prove the existence of an event that caused the failure to comply with the obligation. In the absence of guilt is proven diligent conduct, as opposed to a fortuitous event or force majeure, which requires identifying the event with the characteristics identified extraordinary, unforeseeable and irresistible.

In sum, the general principle is that the debtor must demonstrate their behavior only diligently to be relieved of liability, unless the law or agreement requiring the presence of a fortuitous event or force majeure. In the latter case is necessary to identify the event which prevented the obligation to comply, and test the competition of the three requirements statements.

2. MORAL DAMAGES

Code 1984, contrast to the Code of 1936, embodies the moral damages caused by failure to comply with obligations. Thus, Article 1322 It establishes that "moral damage, as he had suffered, it is also susceptible of redress" .

moral damage may be incurred not only individuals but also to legal persons, as it has established a Constitutional Court ruling. E he issue is common when it comes to individuals. However, divergent views emerge quickly when trying to ascertain whether legal persons can also be compensated for this item.

For this purpose, to adopt the concept of moral damage broadly understood as any injury violation or impairment of a subjective right or legitimate interest of an extra- , suffered by one subject as a result of the unlawful action of another person . According to this concept, are -pecuniary or moral rights those aimed at protecting goods or personal budgets , which make up what the person is . This sense of moral damage leaves the stagnant concept means this institution as the psychological impact produced by the taxable person for a wrongful act, which manifests as pain and suffering (pain and suffering ) , humiliation, " Suffer pain and " common law, etc. In this vein, moral damages arise from the violation of an extra-without inquiring into the existence of a particular emotional state of the taxpayer.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, it should be noted that the possibility that a person legal can be compensated for pain and suffering was rejected by our judiciary. Thus, in the Civil Jurisdictional 1997 Plenum held in Lima on November 18, 1997, established "the moral harm is made by suffering, impairment, pain, worry, grief spiritual, can only be sustained by natural persons. " On this basis, the plenary agreed unanimously " that moral damages can not be sustained by legal persons " .

As can be seen, the agreement of the plenary cited jurisdictional response to a traditional conception of moral damage. However, by the Constitutional Court ruling of August 14, 2002, declared from the amparo filed by the Fund Rural Savings and Loan of San Martin from the Communication and Services Company LLC and others to refrain from disseminating inaccurate news, because it affects the banking rights, the guarantee of savings, self employment, and workforce stability of that financial institution.

In this case, the Constitutional Court found that legal persons could also be in possession of certain fundamental rights in certain circumstances. According to that ruling, this ownership is clear from Article 2 , paragraph 17) of the Constitution Policy 1993, which recognizes the right of everyone to participate individually or in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the nation. In this regard, according to the Constitutional Court, to the extent that organizations formed by individuals are integrated in order to make and defend their interests, that is, to act for and replacement of natural persons, many rights of the latter extend over legal persons.

This position was explicitly stated by the previous 1979 Constitution, which in its article 3 provided that the fundamental rights provided for in Article 2, were also property of legal persons as may be applicable. While this principle has not been picked up by the Constitution 1993, expressly, it does show that the current Peruvian law has opted for the vulnerability of the legal person, for non-pecuniary rights. The silence of the Constitution that governs us determined that when the article 2 refers to the rights of the individual, they must be understood in the broadest sense, ie that also incorporate people legal.

Thus, our initial corollary becomes stronger, because this interpretation can give constitutional support to the thesis to understand the moral and non-pecuniary rights involvement. And that leads temperament, of course, to include a legal person within the sphere of protection of these rights.

Finally, as to the nature of the remedy for this kind of damage, it is true that it is rare to find injured interests in contractual matters of morality. However, this is no objection to not be repaired if they prove existence. Better, in fact, imperfect seek redress in this case, the delivery of a sum of money to repair a non-material damage, to leave unprotected the right violated.

3. QUANTIFICATION OF DAMAGE OF HARD EVIDENCE

Code 1984, unlike the previous Code of 1936, provides an interesting rule for quantification of damage difficult probanza. This formula has been followed by the section 1332 °, which provides that "if the compensation for damage can not be tested on a precise amount, the judge shall fix fair value " .

Here it should be noted that when circumstances arise in respect of some cases of damage of a special nature, the law refers the settlement, therefore preferred, at the discretion of the judge discretion, in fair value, which can adapt better to the nature of such assumptions. It follows the precept that the most appropriate legislative justice, given the peculiarity of course, be achieved through prudent role of the judge.

Therefore, in the case of section 1332 of the Civil Code, the law provides a mechanism for quantifying the recovery of damages difficult probanza. The rule is immediately preceded by the Article 1226 Italian Civil Code No. 1942, which states that "if the damage can not be tested on precise amount, the judge settled by a fair valuation" .

Commenting on the device Italian Code, by reasons which are valid for our system, Adriano Cupis same article notes that presupposes the impossibility of proving the real and effective magnitude of the damage, making it an institution that, as a substitute remedy, stands in for the test impossible. However, the fair valuation may also dispense with exceptional cases of impossibility, ie, not acting as a remedy but takes on the role of an instrument to compensate for damages, which the legislature has preferred to any other possible evidence.

In this case, is left to self-determination and prudent judge the amount of compensable injury, he should exercise his discretion discretionary basis both to the peculiar characteristics of the legal nature of the institutions involved, as to what the case may require.

4. CREDITOR MORA

Unlike the 1936 Civil Code, the Code of 1984 is the default of the creditor organically.

On this issue, Caballero Lozano understands that it is a mishap that occurs in compliance with the obligations, if the creditor fails to cooperate promptly with the debtor to the extent necessary to take place in implementing the program established delivery.

regard, the author said he wondered in bewilderment how the creditor may refuse to accept a pay equity , which in principle can not be expected rather than benefit. But the truth is that traffic continues to offer us examples in which the owner of a good experience leaving it more advantages to a third party holding it under his own immediate dependence. If the lender is the preferred high interest rates continue to receive before-he-can benefit directly from the sum of money. Are also cases of doubtful legality, as when, for cyclical economic reasons, the owner of a thing to be restored preferred that the debtor continues guarding and therefore bear the costs that will be required.

described assumptions allow us to realize that creditor cooperative activity is presented as essential and necessary for the faithful performance of the obligation. Otherwise, even if the debtor is willing, could not meet the delivery charge.

Among the requirements for you to set the default of the creditor is possible to highlight the following: first, reached by the implementation time, and then offer the debtor provision purpose of bringing to the creditor receiving it.

On the second point, Albaladejo understands that the offer of payment by the debtor not only declares its readiness to comply with the provision, but requires the creditor to receive it or put on his part, need to be made. There is, therefore, an injunction, it can be in any way, even verbally. However, this rule suffers except the automatic default that the law provides for certain obligations. In such cases, from the time of maturity occurs and the debtor has the benefit to the creditor, the payment is in default without having to be summoned to receive it.

As a last requirement, in order to configure the default of the creditor is also necessary that unreasonably refuses to accept the payment, or do their part as necessary to enable made, or otherwise not in a position to receive the benefit that is offered accordingly.

Thus, when expressions like "the creditor justifiably refuse delivery", "refuses to mark their cooperation", or "rightly refuses to accept the payment" referred to reject it because it is offered appropriately (for example, is not full, or is intended to make it in time, form or place other than the one agreed, etc.). In these cases the delay of the creditor is not configured.

5. FURTHER DAMAGE IN THE PENALTY obligational

Code 1984, contrast to the Code of 1936, allows obligational penalty increases when the parties have agreed on compensation for further damage.

The possibility of modifying the amount of the penalty was covered by the Civil Code of 1936 by the following rule:

"Section 1227 .- The judge equitably reduce the penalty is manifestly excessive, or when the principal obligation had been partly or irregularly complied with by the debtor .

By the enactment of this rule, the Civil Code of 1936 and eventually abandoned the rigidity of the system iniquity absolute immutability of the Code of 1852, with origins in the ancient text of the Code Napoleon, 1804 to accommodate a relative immutability system allows the reduction of the penalty. No However, as can be seen, this rule does not admit the possibility of increasing the amount of the penalty.

Like the Civil Code of 1936, the system adopted by the Code of 1984 is the relative immutability, ie allowing the reduction of the amount of the penalty clause when it is manifestly excessive, but does not authorize the increase. However, the Civil Code introduces a significant modification under which the damages exceed the amount of the penalty shall be eligible for compensation if compensation is agreed further damage.

further damage is referred to those losses it has sustained the creditor over the agreed amount as a penalty. Considering the limitation of liability for the penalty, the system aims to ensure that the creditor breached the obligation is the full collection of the penalty, which is compensation for the damage. But additionally protects the lender would have provided compensation for the injury further, to demand, as showing damage in excess of the amount appropriated as a penalty.

De According to the above, the covenant of further injury compensability is designed to eliminate the disadvantage in that the creditor would be if the damage is greater than the amount of the penalty. This is a good account of custody that the parties privately assign their interests to the effect that the actual damage exceeds the amount previously agreed upon as a penalty.

worth noting that some jurisdictions have provided that protection can be provided privately, not in the form of further damage, "but by the court itself is empowered to increase the amount of penalties tiny. Thus, Article 1152 of the French Civil Code, through its amendments by Law No. 75-597 of July 9, 1975 and Law No. 85-1097 of October 11, 1985, admits the possibility that the judge even automatically, to increase the penalty when this is manifestly tiny.

In our system, however, this protection can only be obtained through private agreement that provides for compensation for further damage and to the extent that the creditor gets to prove its existence.

Despite the progress that the stipulation meant further damage to the impossibility of increasing the amount of the penalty posed by the Code of 1936, the fracture could be objected to simplify evidentiary function represented by this agreement. Indeed, the main problem about further damage is that the creditor must prove that the damage that is intended to include within this concept has not been covered by the penalty, otherwise, we would be faced with damage not compensable, having been absorbed by the obligational amount agreed upon as a penalty, the same limitation that having means stipulated in every respect.

For this reason, in practice, the creditor will be obliged to prove the full damages, including those covered by the penalty, so that once demonstrated that the entity arising from the breach tort is more than worthwhile, it can detract from the value of latter. The remainder will be what the debtor has to pay by way of further harm. However, note that incurred thus precisely in which parties seek to avoid a covenant to a penalty, that is, the probanza of damage and its amount.

Indeed, although to demand punishment obligational the creditor does not have to prove damages in order to claim further compensation for damage must demonstrate that the injury is greater than the penalty. This will prove indispensable in full of the damage suffered, including those probanza damage repaired by penalty clause.

Italian doctrine has attempted to solve this problem by arguing that the obligation to make reparation to further damage compensation is independent of and concurrent with the penalty. According to this position, getting the creditor compensation for pecuniary damage further added to the service agreed as a penalty, thus allowing the full compensation of damage. These statements are consistent with Article 1382 of Italian Civil Code of 1942, which states that the penalty clause has the effect of limiting the service agreed compensation, unless further damage has been agreed.

However, this position is not compatible with our civil law. This is because the text of section 1341 precludes considering the penalty and further damage the autonomous, in stating that where it has been agreed the further damage the penalty is computed as part of the damages if they were older. As such, rather than considering them as autonomous and concurrent benefits to compensate the damage, our Code has provided that the creditor must prove the integrity of the damage suffered, states that the penalty will be computed as an integral part of the damage so far attained its amount and the excess will only be required where the damage has been agreed upon later.

This temperament carries an additional consequence. Article 1343 of the Code provides that to demand the penalty is not necessary that the creditor try the damages. However, as we have been stating, to claim further compensation for the harm the creditor must prove that the injury suffered is greater than the penalty, for which purpose it will be necessary to accredit "the integrity of harm," which determines who can not be dispensed probanza of those damages are intended to be compensated by the penalty.

This temperament debunks the main difference-and-benefit balance between the amount paid by way of penalty and that you pay for further damage, according to which only the second required to be tested. This is because, as we have noted, in practice, the creditor will also be required to prove the existence of the damage to be compensated for the penalty in order to establish the amount and subtracting corresponding to recover and further damage. As can be seen, this temperament is determined that the covenant of a meaningless penalty.

In conclusion, it should be noted that payment of "integrity" of the penalty referred to article 1341 of the Code should not imply that, when it had agreed further compensation for damage, the debtor is required to pay the entire penalty, not more. In fact, according to the relative mutability system takes our Code, the debtor will always be entitled to ask the judge to reduce the amount of the penalty. This right has been expressly provided for by Article 1346.

The wording of this part of the standard reflects the legislature's view that the penalty clause "should always be full." According to this view, if it has been stipulated further damage repair, and shows that it exceeds the value of the penalty, the debtor is obliged to pay the full penalty and in addition to compensation for the difference in damages.

However, it would be wrong to argue that just because you have agreed compensation for the damage later, the debtor loses the right to request judicial reduction and must pay the full penalty . Only after the judge denied the reduction of the penalty, if it had been applied, the debtor must pay the full amount.

Watch Movie In Sony By Usb

VI CONGRESS OF CIVIL

The Peruvian Institute of Civil Law - IPDC and Legal Research Center "IURIS Veritatis" of the Catholic University of Santa Maria, as part of the network CIJP invite them to participate in the VI National Congress Civil Law, Piura 2010.

Dates: 22 to September 25

Location: Piura

Information and registration:

- Lima: 995,713,048

- Piura: 969669296

Roger Vidal Ramos President of the Peruvian Institute of Civil Law - IPDC
ipdc@conadecivil.com
www.conadecivil.com

Where Can I Buy Mount And Blade Disc

Call for New Members - Legal Research Center "IURIS veritatis"

The Center for Legal Research, "Veritatis IURIS" invited to participate in the call for new members 2010 - II during the month of September, the basic requirement is membership of II to VI semester.
our institution since 2006, is dedicated to research and dissemination of law being official group of the Catholic University of Santa Maria and recorded in the Register of Legal Persons-SUNARP Associations, Area XII Arequipa.Ademas of belonging to the National Convention Law Student Association.

Integrrate one of our Academic Committee IURIS as:

C. Business Law
C. Constitutional Law and Public International
C. Civil Law and Civil Procedure
C. Mining and Environmental Law
C. Labor and Employment Litigation
C. Intellectual Property Law

also serves on the cooperation of our law journal "IURIS veritatis" or realization of academic and training events.

more information write to: mailto: iuris.veritatis @ gmail.com or visit us on Facebook or Twitter as iurisveritatis

Low Ferritin And Vitamin D

VII NATIONAL CONGRESS ON PRIVATE INVESTMENT, FREE COMPETITION AND REGULATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES TO USE PUBLIC TRANSPORT.

Research Center for Law Students - CIED National University of San Antonio Abad of Cusco and Legal Research Center "IURIS Veritatis" of the Catholic University of Santa Maria, as part of the network invite CIJP to participate in VII National Conference on Private Investment, Competition and Regulation of the transport infrastructure services for public use.

Dates: Thursday, 19 and Friday August 20

Location: University Auditorium - Law School UNSAAC Square S / N

Information and registration: Faculty of Law UNSAAC

Judiciary

Contacts: 084-984476175
Victor Mamani Olivera
President of Research Center for Law Students - CIED
Cel: (84) 984 439 934 - estudiard@hotmail.com
www. revistayachaq.com

Natural Herbs To Treat Adenomyosis

PATRIAS HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

What's Inside Benadryl

WHY THE PRESIDENT WANTS VILLA STEIN MEMBERS RESIGN NOW CNM?

The President of the Supreme Court, Javier Villa Stein, was presented yesterday at the ceremony that swore the new President of the National Judicial Council (CNM), Max Cardenas, and which incorporated two new members to that body, the newly elected National Assembly of Rectors on behalf of universities (Luis Maezono and Gaston Soto Vallenas).

According Villa Stein was not invited to the ceremony, CNM error, being the head of the judiciary. But anyway it was, because, he said all citizens were invited. Villa Stein not only attended but took the opportunity to testify in front of everyone, that he recognized only the two new directors, and the rest should resign. The unexpected intervention of Villa Stein made the atmosphere of the ceremony was tight.

Should not our Head of the Judiciary try not to have such outbursts, which only serve to further discredit the whole system Justice? Is not it disrespectful to the whole of Trustees, which, like it or not the doctor Villa Stein, remain members of the CNM, with the status of Supreme Court justices, as stated in the Constitution? Is he not also with other authorities who had attended, as the case of the Attorney General, and in general, with all present? What if each authority disagrees with the way the contrary, takes any public ceremony to curse him in his face?

True Villa Stein is still the President of the Supreme most media in our history, and that is giving some pros. Overall is better to stand up to be a faceless authority, especially in a world so tight as that of justice. But watch constantly seek special effects to media.

If the Chief Justice wants CNM members complete their term before the five years that apply, you must use institutional channels. For example, should demand that Congress immediately acted against the case of Efrain Anaya, because inaction is allowing this Adviser, subject to a serious complaint, continue in office. This counselor questioned, just voted against the dismissal of the Supreme Távara and Solis for Alas Peruanas the issue when he discussed before in favor of such removal. Anaya's vote over the two Supreme saving the maximum penalty. A situation that is responsible directly to the President of the Supreme Court, against which there are obvious reasons to do question of state.

Recall that the CNM is an independent constitutional body, so that statements such as Villa Stein, without recourse to the institutional means that our legal system provides to investigate and punish members of the CNM, means an undue interference one branch of government against the body. It is not the same as an ordinary citizen ask the resignation of an authority to do so the president of one of the three branches of government, which also is the most important of all a system of Justice, which also owns the CNM, but with full autonomy.

The approach today made against CNM Villa Stein seems contrary to law and quite inconvenient.

What is the legal basis for Villa Stein has under the law to recognize members of the CNM, and not recognize others? There. The Constitution specifies who can name every five years to members of the CNM (principals, the Supreme Court, professional associations, etc.), And those who may remove by a qualified majority (the Congress). None of these powers is among the powers of the Chief Justice. Therefore, he is obliged to recognize current members of the CNM, while not complete their five-year period. Deciding not to recognize them by a unilateral act, can have an effect on public opinion, but it means an attack on the law, and that is very serious, being none other than the Chief Justice, whose performance is based on respect International Law.

On the other hand is not it absurd to demand the resignation of members of the CNM, just when, abandoning its rigid position Initial, have chosen to demonstrate its willingness to correct and not become a fait accompli a contest so questioned?

remember that many sectors have been asking for the annulment of the contest and display the reviews. The criticism was when the CNM was closed and did not budge. But then, when it's case and awarded the two points, you have to do is to recognize and celebrate that attitude and do not punish them, asking for his resignation. Moreover, they have been clear in saying that this is not a clean sheet against the irregularities that could have, as investigations continue.

Or what I wanted Dr. Villa Stein is rather that the competition will not be declared null and continue, despite the errors and irregularities?

On the other hand, the President of the Supreme seems not to realize that we are in times when, without any need of resignation, each and every one of the current members of the CNM, will be renewed, several months before completed this year. To start, the last day of February, the directors left the CNM Francisco Delgado de la Flor and Edwin Vegas, and just entering his successors.

A major change in relation to what supposedly motivated the request for waiver of Villa Stein since Delgado de la Flor is the director who has been Chairman of the Selection Committee and Appointment of the competition which has just been canceled.

Which means that, if accepted as proposed Villa Stein (the resignation of decency), the main responsible for what happened would not be affected at all because I left office.

Apart from this change of the two representatives of the universities you just realize, is already in the process for selection of three new representatives of professional bodies, who should replace Max Cardenas, Anibal Torres and Ephraim Anaya. The latter is special case because, even without, believe it is in the pillory, since his case has been passed to Congress and the public prosecutor for the alleged commission of an act of corruption, which it seems is true and provable.

In June, then enter three new directors who together with the two universities, will be five new total, which are mostly opposed to the two that would stay. But in August and September, two (Peláez and Mansilla) will also be changed, because it touches on the renovation of the representatives of the Supreme Court itself and the Board of Prosecutors, respectively.

So today we have two new members in June September five and seven members of the CNM will be others in relation to those of today. And all done by the institutional and orderly, without the institutional chaos and trauma that would cause the resignation of five directors, who will need very little to finish his term.

Those who would give up now, as he wants Villa Stein, otherwise do not belong to the group of councilors questioned over the past five years, either because the last contest, or for other reasons. In relation to the competition - as we said - the President of the Commission and concluded his term. Compared to the other questions, the more seriously we must never forget, was the irregular and very suspicious change in voting against the removal of Angel Romero, case involving the Directors Delgado de la Flor and Vegas, and out of the CNM, and Anaya (possibly removed soon), who from the beginning favored Romero. Do not forget either that Angel Romero, a judge dismissed almost had overcome in the competition recently canceled the first two stages, and only lacked the interview to become a Supreme, which would have been a scandal. Why not say anything about this Villa Stein?

To be clear then, that the approach of Villa Stein of directors resign and would not affect that in these five years have been the most controversial or have had more accountable to errors and irregularities in the competition canceled (Delgado de la Flor, Vegas and Anaya), and only hurt those who have had a better performance and is known to have internally all efforts cases to improve procedures for the selection and appointment.

Anyway Villa Stein touches that distinguishes a case by case and clarify what is the responsibility of everyone.

is as if, for example, by poor performances and more recently Robinson Távara Gonzales and Solis was required to renounce the entire Supreme Court, even though everyone knows that there is Supreme also good judges.

Even if the judge denies Villa Stein, our impression is that some people are exploiting the situation to try to disappear at the CNM as an institution, and thus that some of its powers to return to political power (the appointment of judges) and other the judiciary (all removal or evaluation), which for us would be a real setback.

It is a question of reforming and improving the CNM and the manner of electing its members, based on practical experience we already have on their functioning.

One last question. If Villa Stein really wants to improve the justice system, why not start at home, and began the reform of the Supreme Court, as or more necessary that the reform of the CNM? The critical that CNM has not solved the problem of provisional among judges, the Supreme forgetting that the interim more headlines, and not because of the CNM, but from the Supreme Executive Council of the Judiciary.

From: Viva Justice Team

Seuss Birthday Invitation Wording

PRESS IURIS
According agreement 12/jun/2010 session on Saturday, suspending the academic and administrative meeting for the day 19/jun/2010 for Father's Day festivities.

Atte. Lupa Castro Miller
Secretariat and Office

When I Shave My Skin Breaks Out

HAPPY FATHER'S DAY LAUNCH OF THIRD issue of our magazine

The Journal of Law IURIS veritatis "presents its 3rd Number!

In this issue we have different items, ranging from comparative law regarding the lack of state Cuban civil proceedings until the tax legal framework for the service activity in the free zone of Tacna.

Reports:
iuris.veritatis @ hotmail.com; 054-95-91329096; 054-95-9172545

Gun With Red Dot On Cod4

COMPETITION: ARBITRATION WITH THE STATE

Dear friends

Circle Administrative Law of the Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru and The Center for Legal Research, "Veritatis IURIS" of the Catholic University of Santa Maria, as part of the network CIJP invite to participate in the "Competition: the State Arbitration" organized by the Circle of Administrative Law and PUCP Arbitration Center. Therefore, know their school spirit and their desire for training and continuous improvement, we invite you to participate in this event.

Sincerely,
Legal Research Center "IURIS Veritatis."


competition rules can be downloaded from the following websites:

• www.cda.org.pe
• www.pucp.edu.pe / consensus

For more details visit: www.iurisveritatis.blogspot.com

Selling Gold Tax Implications

DIPLOMA IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, HUMAN RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION

The Institute for Legal Research "vocatio Iuris" of the Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego Trujillo City and the Center Legal Research, "Veritatis Iuris" of the Catholic University of Santa Maria Arequipa as part CIJP network, invite them to participate in the DIPLOMA IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS, Resolution adopted by Dean No. 064-2010 - School of Law and CC. PP. organized by The LEGAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE "vocatio IURIS" and The School of Law and Political Science National University of Trujillo.

This event has the participation of the leading jurists and authorities of our country.

Institute for Legal Research "vocatio Iuris"

Legal Research Center "Veritatis Iuris"

For more details visit: www.vocatioiuris.com

How Much Power Does A Stock 351m Have

EXPLAINING THE BASICS ... ACADEMIC COMMITMENT

the primacy of the seat in front of the Registry, a contribution that puts an end to a debate unnecessary.

Gunther * Gonzales Barron

BACKGROUND

Since entering into force the Civil Code of 1984, the priority dispute between the seat and title registration material gave origin. This can be seen, and, in the preamble to official regulatory body said that the problem arises in the case of a discrepancy between the contents of the seat in front of contents of title as they debate which of them should take precedence.

A section of the doctrine that the protection afforded by registration, specifically in the field of public faith principle (art. 2014 CC), should be limited to information provided by the seat, so the void that appears in the title material (legal or business contract) does not affect the third, who should be considered protected by its exclusive reliance on the seat. It is said therefore that under the legal security of the third party verification must be reduced to check the registration or registration entry, as too expensive and complicated to require a query of the title.

For practical purposes the adoption of one or another solution can be summarized in the following example: A is the owner of a property under purchase agreements with X, this title is established that A is married, even if the registrar finds that mistakenly single. So far there is no doubt that the owner is A, marital status married. Then A sells the property to B, and in this business are a single filer to take advantage of the error logger. In this contract there is a condition resulting from insufficient power available to the seller. Subsequently B sells the property to the third C which relies solely on the seats and part purchase. If we opt for the thesis that gives absolute value to the registration, then C is protected by public confidence as the cause of invalidity is not on the registry entries, whereas the opposite view states that the defect itself appears business registration (enrolled titles), so that the third C is not worthy of protection. Good account, in contrast here is the thesis of registration entry against the title material.

I have always held the position favorable to the title material, and I think it is time to articulate in a single document the various foundations that protect this position, which I hope will contribute to put an end to a debate that really is unnecessary.

PHILOSOPHICAL CRITICISM To argue that the registry entries have their own life or create a new legal situation

The title contains a transmission business act or registration and may be registered. This gives rise to an administrative officer (Registrar) to extend a seat in which he makes a statement of the legal situation produced. In response, the authors argue the primacy of state registration entry that the discrepancies that exist between it and the title, or the grounds for invalidity to appear just in the subject, become irrelevant to the third, as the inscription is the only having legal effect. That is, the inscription gives rise to a "new status, other than the title and who can live independently of the latter.

The argument is easily refuted when one considers that advertising and the fact situations are inextricably linked in, even if they are in different planes, since the legal fact is that event that once happened in the world legal consequences , and is in the realm of "being" (or not), while advertising is only an instrument to provide general knowledge that very fact, and is in the realm of "known" (I know it or not .) Therefore, the advertising itself is nothing, because it simply exists to enhance the visibility of a particular fact. Within this logic, the legal fact is obviously the concept-prius (first key), which is advertising. In this vein advertising can not exist without the fact, or it may be different, because advertising is a relational concept, which is in relation to a pre-existing, which it serves. Clearly, then, that advertising can never replace or overcome the fact, as this would involve the consistent logical absurdity in admitting the publicity about the vacuum, ie, about nothing to refer. Thus, an event that happens in reality (fact) may be object of narration, as when he relates a newspaper (advertising), but never the narrative (advertising) may amend or repeal the occurrence of the event (fact), which exists by itself, and is in the world of "being" the real facts of the specific situations.

In this regard, it is true that the registration would result in a "new status", which is shown in the following example: if a corporation decides to confer a power, the legal fact is the same whether you are registered or not, if you join is still an act of empowerment, and the record does not have the effect of changing thaumaturgical nature, for this reason, there a "new status" but the record gives advertising the same event (power), which does not become another one. It is true that you can produce some special legal consequences as a result of registration, but that in no way change the legal nature of the act, which remains exactly the same (a power). Advertising can not have its own life, it always refers to a fact, without it there is no publicity. Therefore, the registration does not create a new legal situation is different, which means that advertising does not have the strength to lead a fact alone does not exist.

CRITICISM LEGAL TO THOSE WHO HOLD THE SEAT HAS OWN LIFE REGISTRATION OR CREATE A NEW STATUS

A sector of the English doctrine holds that the contents of the document and the content of the inscription are different, which dissociates the "title" (business document that evidences the act or transaction ") with respect to the" registration entry (legal status or right under the title). Therefore, only the latter affects the third, which is achieved only seat priority, and the title becomes irrelevant.

Where born this idea referred to a registration may be autonomous in relation to the instrument is its efficient cause? Well, this idea originated in German law, where the transfer of ownership operates through abstract agreement and subsequent registration. The abstract agreement is simply a statement of joint intention to transfer the one hand and purchased the other, the same which is completely unrelated business that has the causal basis (purchase, donation, exchange, etc.).. If the business causal is zero, the transfer of ownership or other real right is still valid, since the abstract agreement is detached from its cause. In any case, the injured party is entitled only to an action to recover obligational character (debt), but the real right will remain unshaken: "From the standpoint of legal policy, the attitude of Cc (German) can be justified by the desire to avoid any doubts on the validity of causal business, effective only inter partes, may harm the clarity of the real legal situation. "

In this sense, the real business added to the registration abstract, produces the effect of transfer of ownership or other real right, being detached from the business causal. Both of them have independent legal life and therefore, within the German legal system, it is permissible for the "seat" (finding that transfer of ownership in a business view abstract) to dissociate the "title mediate" (business causal). Within the German system, the causal business (sales) would be the "title mediate" completely detached from the abstract business of attribution which is published through the "seat", "The transfer of ownership, as it is shaped by legal system as a bargaining type of legal action, can not, according to our law, contain within itself its cause. There is, according to our law, an act of transfer of ownership by reason of sale or donation, but only the act of transfer of ownership 'per se', ie without regard to the cause by which transmission occurs on the property. To the extent that the law of the case abstracts the type of business act of attribution, is designated right to business, business abstract. "

For this reason, the budget for the existence of an inscription is detached from the real business title abstract. When this budget is not presented, it is illogical to separate the claim the "title" with respect to the "registration or seat." The large differences between the German and Peruvian (actually, the difference is generalized to all other European and Latin American rights) are inapplicable in our theory of the inscription "substantive." However, it views things, not even in the German system can decouple the registration entry to the title that it is based. Indeed, recall that even in this area, the registration of a title advertises: the real business abstract ("I want to convey and you want to buy"), which is detached from the required causal business (sale, exchange, donation .) That is, the seat registration can not live alone, even in Germany, and therefore has created the abstract business technical device whose purpose is that the events or conditions causal business (sale, exchange, etc..) do not affect the transfer of the right. More or less that is what happens with the thesis that detaches the title of the seat, as the void that appears on the first is not transferred to the registration. In sum, there is a law Germanic trilogy in the process of transfer of rights: first, the causal business (sale, exchange, gift) that becomes the "title mediate" transmission, which constitutes the base from supporting obligational perspective. En segundo lugar viene el negocio abstracto, basado en el anterior, por el cual se declara la voluntad de transmitir y que constituye el “título inmediato” de la transferencia. En tercer lugar tenemos la inscripción que da publicidad del negocio abstracto y cierra el proceso de transferencia. Nótese que el asiento registral contiene el título inmediato, esto es, el negocio abstracto; por lo que la inscripción siempre cumple la función publicitaria de un negocio o título transmisivo. El dato adicional es que esa inscripción sí aparece desligada del título mediato o negocio causal, pero siempre necesita del título inmediato.

En consecuencia, en el sistema alemán se ha tenido el cuidado Always set a different business (abstract) to justify the transfer, and that is a matter of record advertising. Thus, here too the fact dissociates (abstract business) advertising (registration), and at most, the separation is between another business (causal) with the transmission business (abstract). However, in our country there are the abstract business, so this is not the subject of advertising, and if there is no causal relevance to the business (title), then the question arises: what action is contained in our registration? If the seat does not publish the abstract business (which does not exist), nor the causal business (to live detached from the seat thereof, in theory), then the conclusion would be that the inscription in Peru DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY BUSINESS. It is absurd to think that there may be a right (real or otherwise) without a title that originated. Or is that the registrar to extend the seat, he created the business? How this claim obviously can not be sustained, then it is obvious that this thesis is refuted.

VALLET remember is not the same rights to publish some abstracted from its title, to publish the same rights to its title, together with him, reflecting his cause, purpose and special stipulations. The registry was not merely say that such property belongs to a specific person, but informs us that such ownership has occurred under this or the legal business, and it is this business that has access to the Land Registry. The eminent English writer gives the example of the trust, where the real effectiveness of the act translative hidden contrasts with the obligation imposed on the purchaser. Nevertheless, if the obligation is inserted into the act, that is causaliza and evidently affected. Therefore, if you publish the trust business, the failure to be generating the inefficiency of transmission to the third sub-purchaser, either for lack of standing of the transferee (who must formalize the transfer only the beneficiary of the trust), or simply by bad faith of the third. Thus it is clear that the legal business complex content influences the later life of the law passed (and published in the registry). So would a judicial declaration of nullity of a contract of sale, resulting void the property transfer with the business operated was not related to the cause of nullity of defects occur in a clause or another obligational real character.

Similarly expressed LACRUZ and Sancho, to whom the registration is not a legal transaction, and only hosts the event registration (title), in the philosophical sense is the efficient cause of registration. With its rich natural concepts LAGOS NUÑEZ said: "The Registry of rights, as it were in chemistry by body simply is the result of isolation, independence and abstraction of one element: the individual right of real nature. Has occurred only in the German BGB ... in a word, in Spain, as in Latin laws, the real law is born and lives in dependence on mixing or obligations. "

Therefore, the seat has no life of its own because it is connected causally with the title that gave it birth. In our system causalist economic powers does not fit the seat post registration something other than the title. Abstract systems, such as German, can not justify a law of this type, but not ours it is causal, and yet it must be remembered that the Germanic inscription is always connected to a business (abstract), that is, to a degree . It follows that a comparison is not enough legislation between different countries' legal systems, it is necessary to know the basics of each institution to avoid the error of benefit to a foreign doctrine different legal bases and unenforceable. The legal transplant can not be automated.

CRITICISM ARGUMENTS ABOUT HOLDING ECONOMIC SEAT FOR REGISTRATION

The philosophical and legal arguments set out in the previous two paragraphs, about the nature of advertising, are already sufficient grounds for the critical position. However, holders of registration entry own life did not remain with folded arms and turned to the familiar economic arguments, as he referred to the need to reduce transaction costs. Indeed, if the operation of a market economy means that trade should be encouraged in order that the goods pass naturally into the hands of those who value them more so, and that is how wealth is used in the most efficient , thus increasing the overall utility and benefit of society, then it seems logical to be provided to the commission of acts of voluntary exchange, thus it is necessary to "reduce transaction costs."

course nobody is against simplification, elimination of unnecessary formalities and facilitate trade within a context of legal certainty. However, there does not appear that the "reduction of transaction costs" will become a general principle of canon law or a quasi-sacred, unyielding material justice. If so then all transcendent values on which our civilization is built should be rolled back in this purely formal criterion of dubious justice when it comes to relationships between powerful and weak. Not acceptable that the values \u200b\u200band principles which underlie our Constitution, such as human dignity, equality, freedom, etc., Must be subjected to any formal economic approach.

Perhaps this theoretical analysis may be sufficient to eliminate the overvaluation that is intended to give the cost reduction approach. However, we will also make a practical analysis in the light of the conflict of interests to be solved under the primacy positions seat or title.

The principle of public faith in Art. CC 2014, seeks to answer the following question: what happens if a transmission chain prior act is null? Indeed, the natural consequence of the invalidity bargaining passes render ineffective the transmission business, and if it is the subject of a new legal provision for third, then it does not buy anything because his act alienating a non domino . If A sells to B and then B sells to C, then the invalidity of the first business that B does not own, so the second business would be a sale of property of others that do not produce the effect of turning the owner to C . However, the principle public trust, whose motivation is to provide legal certainty with justice in the area of \u200b\u200bmovement of goods, is based on the honest belief of the third in the Registry in such a way that C can be protected from the invalidity of the prior act provided that acquires who appears as such in the register, and it has no cause of conflict and enters his own act. Note that public trust is a mechanism in extremis, for which the system is in the ethical conflict of preferring the interest of a subject in front of another ("A or C?), As one of the two will be stripped of their right . Here comes into dispute the reasons for the original owner, who is affected by a void that often is not caused because the victim of forgery, fraud, deceit, etc., while on the other side is the reason for the trusted third party that acquires the log. Both positions deserve legal protection, and the mere fact of choosing one of them and it seems unfair. Given such a perspective is necessary for the preferred subject is simply "clean hands" (clean hands in English or Italian Puliti mani) to deserve this special and extraordinary care. For this reason, it is not permissible for a third party who has incurred serious doubts or ambiguities in the acquisition, it was rewarded by the laws against an owner affected by nullity. Note that often the two subjects (the original owner and third) are innocent because they act in disregard of the facts behind the inaccuracy, but the third was able to meet this situation with a simple title refers to the transferring material, how can receive protection? "Under what principle of law can give priority to the fault versus no-fault? Public faith must be regarded as an exceptional mechanism for repealing the legal, ie eliminates the drag effect of the revocation, and imposes a fiction. This being so, it can only be reached when the end benefited from the protection has acted diligently and had no rational way of knowing the cause of invalidity. Thus, we have a concept of social morality and legal justice can act on the case, and without narrow dogmatic molds.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly interpreted and with a striking uniformity in a hundred years, there is a clear primacy of the material on the registration entry, since the latter is considered a mere "summary" of that no proper nouns. Among the many enforceable spoken on this issue, and the collection of which well deserves a thesis, we have marked with numbers: 2356-98-Lima (Official Gazette: 12 November 1999), 415-99-Lima (Official Gazette: September 1, 1999), 158-2000-San Martín (Official Gazette: October 30, 2000), 1322-2001, Lima (Official Gazette: October 01 2002), 2580-2001, Lima (Official Gazette: May 2, 2002). Therefore, it must be concluded that there is a current consolidated case law that supports the position here maintained, for which the registration records can only be understood in accordance with the title of which they come, and never take precedence over him.

However, recently formed a Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court has issued a careless sentence which holds that verification of archived titles only necessary when the registration entry is insufficient information, because otherwise "raises the cost of legal acts." On the particular notice what it means despicable DEPRIVED OF THEIR RIGHT TO A LEGITIMATE OWNER for the simple fact that the third party did not want to spend four new soles on a title to read archived. Perhaps that is a rise in transaction costs?, And if you strip out "that allows anyone? Can you eliminate rights for a third party acting with guilt? How long the reduction of transaction costs is a general principle of law? Can not be placed on one level the proposed cost reduction with the principles of material justice, such as human dignity, freedom, autonomy and effective protection of private rights acquired.

Public faith is a radical solution that gives the status of truth to what is not, it repeals the absolute effects of nullity, thus leaving in question the values, even foundational to human dignity itself, which support the management decision to disqualify a particular act or transaction. For this reason, legal systems that host the registration principle they do it in the media, the imposition of different requirements (good faith, onerous, that the record is not showing the causes of invalidity, etc..), Or other cases simply is not received by respect for the legal reality and the values \u200b\u200bit embodies. Therefore, the statement referred to the primacy of the seat hypothetical "cost reduction" is nothing more than a theoretical siren without any support in the General Principles of Law. Fortunately

recently a Board of Social and Constitutional Law of the Supreme Court has returned to good teaching by issuing a copy statement in which he analyzes with great depth and detail the requirements for implementing the principle of public faith. Not the case to analyze the entire decision, which certainly is very interesting, but limited to the relevant definition makes the registry entry as simple summary or abstract of title material, so it can never be independent or substantive. Thus be regarded as the isolated execution quoted above has been superseded by a most recent decision, especially if there is a test case virtually repeated in a century.

To finish this point I note that not a single American author who you can think that the wording of a document made by an administrative official can overcome the title of acquisition or transfer contract. In the United States law, which some see as an ideal, however, no comes to this bold conclusion. Why we want to impose on our country? Without doubt, the third world not only arises from the claim back legal models, but mainly by extreme want the copy to the point where the branch intends to be even more radical than the parent. That certainly does not only occur in the field of Law & Economics, but also in Constitutionalism sacrosanct. Therefore, if you want to copy, then at least copy well.

CRITICISM ABOUT THE CASE OF RELEVANCE HOLD FOR REGISTRATION SEAT

also presents practical arguments a efectos a dar primacía al asiento registral. En tal sentido se dice: “Las partes, y para ser mas preciso, el Notario, son responsables por los títulos que ingresan al registro. Cuando el título accede al registro la responsabilidad se traslada al registrador, quien debe calificarlo y, de encontrarlo conforme, proceder a la inscripción. Cualquier error en la inscripción, por tanto, debe ser responsabilidad del registrador (o del registro). Exigirle a los interesados que revisen los títulos archivados equivale casi a que las partes realicen la función calificadora del registrador. Esto es inadmisible” . Lo mismo puede decirse respecto a otros argumentos análogos, tales como la “seguridad jurídica del purchaser "or" the faster movement of goods, etc. Unfortunately

such utilitarian arguments, analogous to the Economists, can not prevail over the fundamental values \u200b\u200bof the legal and general principles. In fact, you can not consecrate the activity of the registrar to the extent that its wrong or criminal action may have the serious consequence of MODIFY OR REPEAL THE ACT OR BUSINESS HELD BY INDIVIDUALS, for the simple fact that there is inconsistency between the title and seat. Such a system involves giving preference to the simple way by the mere fact of being such, or because the government decreed it that way through a official. This is only achieved a formalistic system irrational, and is even at odds with liberal principles underlying the utilitarian argument, because the arbitrariness of the state prevails on the lawful acts of individuals. Indeed, advertising is preferred here empty, without the legal fact which must necessarily refer.

To refute this thesis, we must also remember that the drafting of an official referred to the legal business data can never have the effect CHANGE YOUR OWN BUSINESS. When a person acquires a right does so by virtue of the sale, exchange or donation, ie conferring a business recognized by law, and never in recognition of the simple writing of an administrative document by an official. What would be the mode of acquisition in such a case? Who were the parties to the purchasing act, the registrar perhaps? Is it a consideration or free? All these questions come before a thesis can not be sustained, because in itself lead to the acquisitions of property, regulated by the Civil Code, must include a hypothesis as follows: "The decision of the registrar to put on a seat ". In no world system that the registration is accepted fact replace the purchasing, in the best cases becomes the final stage of transmission, but can never ignore the fact conferring legal, because otherwise it would result in an advertisement aimed at herself, and published the fact that it does not matter.

ON REGULATORY STANDARDS

is true that the new General Regulation of Public Registries (RGRP) tried to give relative autonomy to the registration entry, separating it from the title that gave it birth. While that may have been the intention of the drafters of the rule, however, be considered as a regulation can not alter the causal system adopted by the substantive Civil Code. For this reason, they are to reject the views that seek to give independent substantive value to the registration entry. For its part, the Regulations of the Registrar of Companies (RRS) also tried to point out that the grounds of inaccuracy or disability must be included only in the registration records, which aims to give privilege to the registration on the title. However, all these reforms should be considered failed because a modest registration regulations or procedure can not alter the substantive rules of the legal business formation, causes of acquisition of rights, nullity of business and its effects, nor can they enter a radical change would business support Germanic stamp abstract, against all norms and principles now firmly implanted in the Civil Code.

Moreover, comprehensive reading of those same regulations are cautioned not possible to give independent life to an inscription (advertising) to the act which gave rise to (legal fact). Thus, for example, provides for acts registrable (causes) in the art. 3 RRS, in addition, the registration must include the title (event causal) which is the subject of advertising (art. 13-d RRS), and so does the RGRP where corrections are made under the act causal and the invalidity of this determines the cancellation registration, in addition, the absence of the act implies that it can be administratively cancel the registration, etc. Therefore, the same rules it follows that there is a necessary link between the act and the seat, and this is because advertising always refers to a legal fact.

WHAT IS THE REGISTRY ENTRY?

is said that the Peruvian system is a proper registration of "extraction", ie, the registrar would be obliged to remove the title only relevant law for others, and this law is published in the seat . In this regard, it is argued that if the Register has done an extraction complex, then it is logical that the third party is to be sent back to the title filed. Actually, that statement can not be sustained because advertising does not exist by itself, ie without a real object to which it relates. Again we reiterate that there are two different levels: one, advertising the fact that imperative need for this is its object, and another is the fact that he lives alone, either in advertising or otherwise, for obvious and logical questions is the concept-prius.

If there is an extraction system with substantive effects, namely that the registration, without the title would be sufficient to support an acquisition, then it should be stated in explicit legal standards that recognize the unprecedented economic system functions, and for this purpose not just the careless drafting of a regulation, but a whole set of civil institutions that meet this criterion. For example, if the registration repealing the title and all that matters is that, then there should be a procedural mechanism that allows the purchaser of a right to take prior knowledge of the drafting of the seat for you can challenge it. The reason is obvious: if a public official, by deceit, guilt or ignorance, has the power to repeal a legal business just because purchasing to write an entry, what remedies gives the order to challenge that decision? Mandatory should be given the chance to "appeal the inscription" to protect property rights recognized in the Constitution or any other rights based on private autonomy. Needless to say, none of this exists, since registration is only a summary of the title, a mere formal statement simplifying purposes and is not governed by the substantive laws, but registration regulations. Therefore, if you want to argue that the "extraction" radical effect that purchasing occurs (which does not exist in Comparative Law) then you first have to prove that this system actually exists, and since we can not prove the absence of standards and background, then the whole argument falls apart by itself.

In this sense, the technique of extracting a summary of the title, transcribe or are simply facilitators of formal advertising from different perspectives. By removing it gives the audience a quick summary and the legal position, notwithstanding that it actually occurs under the business attributes, including transcript, however, given the public a full content of the information without pick up. Choose one or the other is a simple matter of organization registration office, but there may be advanced to the point of creating magical effects or caster to register, and get to the point of ignoring the reality that in this case is the legal fact purchasing. Something else: the subjects have the fundamental right to self-regulate their private interests through contracts or legal transactions, including use of their property, but the proposed system a government official would have the power, through an error you or a misinterpretation, to CHANGE THE CONTRACT OR MODIFY AN ACQUISITION OR CHANGE THE CONTENT OF A COURT JUDGEMENT, and just for the sake of writing in bad shape a registration entry. This system does not exist or can exist because it is against the fundamentals of the legal system governing private individuals, and violates the role of the state itself. In short, the work of the registrar to "extract" (or short) the legal fact relevant circumstances through a registration does not mean at all that "what matters" is the only reality, including repeal of purchasing legal fact. A system of this kind, to the extent arbitrary because the private relations would be at the mercy of a powerful state, THERE IN COMPARATIVE LAW.

other hand, we can also outline practical reasons to close the case for our position. The first is to recognize that the registrar can not enjoy much power that allows you to declare your deposit only the acquisition of rights, even when the facts of the public to express something different. In other words, it is unacceptable to provide a public official the power to repeal legal transactions between private parties, for the simple fact of having made an erroneous entry. Such a system is repugnant to the fundamental values \u200b\u200bof our legal system, and can not be admitted even in speculative way.

A second practical reason: If the registration entry contains all relevant information, then wondered why the title is filed if no function may be invoked? It has sometimes been criticized this position by noting that no substantive advertising is related to the formal advertising, and the reality is that it does, and there can only be invoked against (advertising material) when the information is knowable effectively (formal advertising), otherwise it would result in an intolerable fiction. Moreover, the best doctrine states that one of the three fundamental principles of the register (in this case refers to the business, but the conclusion may well generalize) is that of OPPOSABILITY RATIO AND knowability: "the protection of third parties requires that they can be opposed only those facts which they themselves can obtain knowledge through consultation with the advertising tool, that is the record."

For this reason, the Peruvian system, and I firmly believe that in all others, the registration entry is simply a formal statement of the title. That is, when the Registrar considers that a title is suitable for access to land registration, proceed to issue a summary of the act or contract in the registration sheet. But that summary is made in a purely formal, without giving any substantive or material efficiency to content seat, since there is no separation between them. In fact, what is sought is to give things to the users through the extension of information extracted seats to allow a quicker understanding of the registration sheet, but this summary of information is formal as it does not repeal or abrogate the only reality legal material contained in the title. Good account, it is only a measure of formal advertising to simplify access to the users of the information contained in the registry, but nothing more.

CONCLUSIONS

transmissions or acquisition of rights performed under legal acts recognized by the law, among others, the legal acts or business of file. The registration of the title of attribution change or mutate its own nature, because the registry is to feature advertising of certain legal facts, but not invent or denature. Advertising, therefore, can not exist without the fact published, which follows the natural primacy (prius concept) of title on registration.

Within this context, the registration entry is not going to be a formal summary of the title, no proper nouns, which means for practical purposes the third material should check the title to rule out any causal notorious invalidity or unenforceability, and in order to achieve protection of the public faith registration contained in art. CC 2014.

The principle of public faith attempts to resolve a human drama involving the two men dispute the ownership of an asset. This will always be a disadvantage, as the original owner or the third party purchaser. In certain circumstances, opt for the latter, but this requires imposing acting with clean hands, which applied to this case involves the verification of title. Otherwise, there is no moral or legal reason to do prevail its position on the owner affected by the invalidity. __________________

* Professor of Civil Law at the Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, Universidad de San Martín de Porres and Universidad Inca Garcilaso de la Vega. Chairman of the Administrative Tribunal COFOPRI Property.