The objective of this article is to define the legitimacy of the process, as well as to understand the different types of legitimation that have been defined in the doctrine and, consequently, adopted in the Peruvian civil process. Also, it seeks to analyze how the control of this budget should be in the process. It does not intend to settle a controversy, but only to expose our ideas, and try to give this procedural budget a practical purpose, from a reading of it from the Constitution and the general theory of the process.

The objective of this article is to define the legitimacy of the process, as well as to understand the different types of legitimation that have been defined in the doctrine and, consequently, adopted in the Peruvian civil process. Also, it seeks to analyze how the control of this budget should be in the process. It does not intend to settle a controversy, but only to expose our ideas, and try to give this procedural budget a practical purpose, from a reading of it from the Constitution and the general theory of the process.

In this academic work, the authors look into the foundations and limitations of the iura novit curia principle in the Peruvian civil procedure, in order to give practical responses to the main challenges faced by judges in its application. Moreover, they explain that a good understanding of such principle should not permit a judge to submit a judgment based on legal causes that were not duly invoked and defined by the claimant, or that have not been discussed by the parties during the procedure. Finally, they propose that the application of the iura novit curia principle does not allow judges to render a “surprise decision” based on a legal argument that was not part of the controversy in the procedure.

This article addresses the treatment of the joinder and the intervention of third parties in the Civil Procedure Code. The authors examines the procedural institutions for try provide the right interpretation of the procedure rules concerning to the material and get a true effective jurisdictional protection.

El artículo analiza la tutela jurisdiccional efectiva en el proceso contencioso administrativo peruano, centrándose en un nuevo precedente vinculante de la Corte Suprema de Justicia. Para dicho fin, se abordan problemas y soluciones, como la igualdad de regulaciones sectoriales y la prohibición de incorporar argumentos de derecho distintos en sede administrativa. Se destaca la importancia de interpretar el proceso contencioso administrativo para efectivizar los derechos de los administrados. Se enfatiza el deber de los jueces de garantizar el debido procedimiento administrativo y se propone una interpretación sistemática de la limitación de presentación de medios probatorios.

The article analyzes the effective judicial protection in the Peruvian administrative litigation process, focusing on a new binding precedent from the Supreme Court of Justice. To that end, problems and solutions are addressed, such as the equality of sectoral regulations and the prohibition of incorporating different legal arguments in the administrative sphere. The importance of interpreting the administrative litigation process to enforce the rights of the administrators is highlighted. The duty of judges to guarantee due administrative procedure is emphasized, and a systematic interpretation of the limitation on the presentation of evidence is proposed.

In this academic work, the authors look into the foundations and limitations of the iura novit curia principle in the Peruvian civil procedure, in order to give practical responses to the main challenges faced by judges in its application. Moreover, they explain that a good understanding of such principle should not permit a judge to submit a judgment based on legal causes that were not duly invoked and defined by the claimant, or that have not been discussed by the parties during the procedure. Finally, they propose that the application of the iura novit curia principle does not allow judges to render a “surprise decision” based on a legal argument that was not part of the controversy in the procedure.

This article addresses the treatment of the joinder and the intervention of third parties in the Civil Procedure Code. The authors examines the procedural institutions for try provide the right interpretation of the procedure rules concerning to the material and get a true effective jurisdictional protection.

A través de este artículo académico, los autores desarrollan el fundamento y límites del principio de iura novit curia en el proceso civil peruano, a efectos de poder dar respuestas prácticas a los principales problemas que conlleva su aplicación por parte del juez. Así, explican por qué un adecuado entendimiento del principio iura novit curia no puede conllevar a que el juez emita sentencias en base a causales jurídicas que no han sido debidamente delimitadas en la demanda, y que hayan constituido materia de debate por las partes en el proceso. Finalmente, señalan por qué la aplicación del principio iura novit curia no permite que el juez pueda emitir fallos sorpresas, es decir, aquellos basados en fundamentación jurídica que no ha sido parte de la controversia en el proceso.

El artículo analiza la tutela jurisdiccional efectiva en el proceso contencioso administrativo peruano, centrándose en un nuevo precedente vinculante de la Corte Suprema de Justicia. Para dicho fin, se abordan problemas y soluciones, como la igualdad de regulaciones sectoriales y la prohibición de incorporar argumentos de derecho distintos en sede administrativa. Se destaca la importancia de interpretar el proceso contencioso administrativo para efectivizar los derechos de los administrados. Se enfatiza el deber de los jueces de garantizar el debido procedimiento administrativo y se propone una interpretación sistemática de la limitación de presentación de medios probatorios.

This article addresses the treatment of the joinder and the intervention of third parties in the Civil Procedure Code. The authors examines the procedural institutions for try provide the right interpretation of the procedure rules concerning to the material and get a true effective jurisdictional protection.

The objective of this article is to define the legitimacy of the process, as well as to understand the different types of legitimation that have been defined in the doctrine and, consequently, adopted in the Peruvian civil process. Also, it seeks to analyze how the control of this budget should be in the process. It does not intend to settle a controversy, but only to expose our ideas, and try to give this procedural budget a practical purpose, from a reading of it from the Constitution and the general theory of the process.

In this academic work, the authors look into the foundations and limitations of the iura novit curia principle in the Peruvian civil procedure, in order to give practical responses to the main challenges faced by judges in its application. Moreover, they explain that a good understanding of such principle should not permit a judge to submit a judgment based on legal causes that were not duly invoked and defined by the claimant, or that have not been discussed by the parties during the procedure. Finally, they propose that the application of the iura novit curia principle does not allow judges to render a “surprise decision” based on a legal argument that was not part of the controversy in the procedure.