El presente trabajo aborda las vulneraciones al deber de idoneidad cometidas por la Cooperativa de Ahorro y Crédito de Ilo Ltda. N.º 50 y el Banco de Crédito del Perú S.A., en el contexto de un procedimiento administrativo seguido ante el INDECOPI. En cuanto a la mencionada Cooperativa, se pone en manifiesto la modificación unilateral de la tasa de interés en los contratos de crédito sin una debida información clara y transparente sobre los cambios, vulnerando el artículo 19° del Código del Protección y Defensa del Consumidor. En cuanto al Banco, se evalúa si la retención de los fondos de Compensación por Tiempo de Servicios (CTS) realizada respecto a uno de los consumidores se efectuó sin haber proporcionado previamente información adecuada sobre el procedimiento ni sobre las consecuencias legales que ello implicaba, contraviniendo así la obligación del proveedor al d...

This article analyzes the nature of the crime of collusion regulated in article 384 of the Peruvian Penal Code, based on the recent jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Justice. The relationship between the illicit of the first paragraph of the aforementioned article -called “simple collusion”- and the second paragraph -called “aggravated collusion”, its protected objects and its nature of crimes of injury or danger will be examined. On this point, a critical analysis of some jurisprudential pronouncements will be made and a position will be adopted on the autonomous nature of both crimes in order to solve practical problems such as the moment of consummation of the crime, the attempt and criminal participation.

This article analyzes the nature of the crime of collusion regulated in article 384 of the Peruvian Penal Code, based on the recent jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Justice. The relationship between the illicit of the first paragraph of the aforementioned article -called “simple collusion”- and the second paragraph -called “aggravated collusion”, its protected objects and its nature of crimes of injury or danger will be examined. On this point, a critical analysis of some jurisprudential pronouncements will be made and a position will be adopted on the autonomous nature of both crimes in order to solve practical problems such as the moment of consummation of the crime, the attempt and criminal participation.

This article analyzes the nature of the crime of collusion regulated in article 384 of the Peruvian Penal Code, based on the recent jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Justice. The relationship between the illicit of the first paragraph of the aforementioned article -called “simple collusion”- and the second paragraph -called “aggravated collusion”, its protected objects and its nature of crimes of injury or danger will be examined. On this point, a critical analysis of some jurisprudential pronouncements will be made and a position will be adopted on the autonomous nature of both crimes in order to solve practical problems such as the moment of consummation of the crime, the attempt and criminal participation.