The distinction between swindle crime and the breach of contract. About the criminal relevance of deceit in contracts

• Autor: Pariona Arana, Raúl
• Formato: artículo
• Fecha de Publicación: 2023
• Institución: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
• Repositorio: Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
• Lenguaje: español
• OAI Identifier: oai:revistaspuc:article/28140
• Enlace del recurso: http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/iusetveritas/article/view/28140
• Nivel de acceso: acceso abierto
• Materia: Contratos; Delito de estafa; Estafa contractual; Incumplimiento de contrato; Engaño; Dolo; Vicio de la voluntad; Perjuicio económico; Contracts; Swindle crime; Contract fraud; Breach of contract; Deceit; Willful intent; Defect of consent; Patrimonial detriment

Contracts are a fundamental element in our current economic system. However, parties sometimes act in bad faith, thereby affecting the contractual relationship. One of the most frequent bad faith conducts is the deceit between the parties to conclude the contract, which then materializes in a breach of contract. This situation has led to the regulation of civil and criminal protection mechanisms. The mechanisms applied in practice include contractual fraud, deceit as a defect of consent and contractual breach. Despite the similarities between these legal institutions, their distinction is extremely important, particularly because the consequence of fraud entails criminal punishment. In that context, this paper features the legal institutions that protect contractual relationships against behaviors where the deceit takes place and analyzes the criteria of delimitation between the swindle crime and the civil institutions.