Through this essay, the author attacks the issues behind the evidentiary gaps that prevent the finding of a causal link between the damage and the wrongdoer, particularly when these evidentiary gaps preclude the claimant from proving who, within a group of persons who have increased the risk of damage, actually caused it. As a solution, the author proposes that the “multiple tortfeasor exception”, which is an application of the “material increase in risk” developed in the common law, can be implemented in Peru thanks to the flexibility provided by the adequate cause (the Peruvian approach to causation). For these purposes, the lessons learned through the common law shall serve as guiding light.

Through this essay, the author attacks the issues behind the evidentiary gaps that prevent the finding of a causal link between the damage and the wrongdoer, particularly when these evidentiary gaps preclude the claimant from proving who, within a group of persons who have increased the risk of damage, actually caused it. As a solution, the author proposes that the “multiple tortfeasor exception”, which is an application of the “material increase in risk” developed in the common law, can be implemented in Peru thanks to the flexibility provided by the adequate cause (the Peruvian approach to causation). For these purposes, the lessons learned through the common law shall serve as guiding light.

A través de este ensayo, el autor desarrolla la problemática de los vacíos probatorios que impiden establecer el nexo causal, particularmente cuando, si bien existe certeza de que el daño ha sido causado por una conducta negligente, es imposible determinar quién —o quiénes— dentro de un grupo que incrementó el riesgo de la producción del daño, efectivamente fue quien ocasiona el perjuicio. Como solución, el autor propone que una de las aplicaciones del concepto del “incremento material del riesgo”, la “excepción del individuo indeterminado”, puede implementarse en el ordenamiento jurídico peruano gracias a la flexibilidad que brinda la teoría de la causa adecuada. Sin embargo, para su aplicación debe observarse el desarrollo realizado por la doctrina y jurisprudencia anglosajona, incluyendo las lecciones aprendidas en el camino.

Through this essay, the author attacks the issues behind the evidentiary gaps that prevent the finding of a causal link between the damage and the wrongdoer, particularly when these evidentiary gaps preclude the claimant from proving who, within a group of persons who have increased the risk of damage, actually caused it. As a solution, the author proposes that the “multiple tortfeasor exception”, which is an application of the “material increase in risk” developed in the common law, can be implemented in Peru thanks to the flexibility provided by the adequate cause (the Peruvian approach to causation). For these purposes, the lessons learned through the common law shall serve as guiding light.

No presenta resumen.

No presenta resumen.

No presenta resumen.