The forced expropriation has been, since the origins of the Peruvian Republic, a useful mechanism for the Government to meet its objectives, at the expense of the lawful damage inflicted to the private actors, conferring a fair compensation in return.In this article the current Peruvian legal regime of forced expropriation is studied, for which purpose both authors compare it with the regulation in the earliest Peruvian constitutions and laws, discovering that the concept has not always been designed in the same way by the constituent or the legislator.

The forced expropriation has been, since the origins of the Peruvian Republic, a useful mechanism for the Government to meet its objectives, at the expense of the lawful damage inflicted to the private actors, conferring a fair compensation in return.In this article the current Peruvian legal regime of forced expropriation is studied, for which purpose both authors compare it with the regulation in the earliest Peruvian constitutions and laws, discovering that the concept has not always been designed in the same way by the constituent or the legislator.

Contracts are celebrated to be complied with. Therefore, breaches of contract are always an irregular and undesirable situation. That being the case, the law guarantees several protection measures against non-compliance, both in private and in public contracts. In the latter case, since the breach can come from either the contractor or the State, the law protects them both. However, Peruvian regulations do not establish the same consequences for the same occurrence, and as a result there are more burdensome consequences if the party which incurred in non-compliance was the contractor. This article seeks to explain that differentiation, through a critical analysis.

The forced expropriation has been, since the origins of the Peruvian Republic, a useful mechanism for the Government to meet its objectives, at the expense of the lawful damage inflicted to the private actors, conferring a fair compensation in return.In this article the current Peruvian legal regime of forced expropriation is studied, for which purpose both authors compare it with the regulation in the earliest Peruvian constitutions and laws, discovering that the concept has not always been designed in the same way by the constituent or the legislator.

Contracts are celebrated to be complied with. Therefore, breaches of contract are always an irregular and undesirable situation. That being the case, the law guarantees several protection measures against non-compliance, both in private and in public contracts. In the latter case, since the breach can come from either the contractor or the State, the law protects them both. However, Peruvian regulations do not establish the same consequences for the same occurrence, and as a result there are more burdensome consequences if the party which incurred in non-compliance was the contractor. This article seeks to explain that differentiation, through a critical analysis.