Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 Period

Descripción del Articulo

The Peruvian electricity market operator is COES, it is a private company under public law, composed and governed by generators, transmitters, distributors, and the Free Users. The Board of Directors, which is the final authority, makes its decisions without any government intervention. Disagreement...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor: Leyva Flores, Ricardo
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2024
Institución:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Repositorio:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Lenguaje:español
OAI Identifier:oai:revistaspuc:article/29631
Enlace del recurso:http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechoysociedad/article/view/29631
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:Derecho de la Energía
Electricidad
Arbitrajes
Regulación de Servicios Públicos
Operador del Mercado Eléctrico Peruano – COES
Energy Law
Electricity
Arbitrations
Utilities Regulation
Peruvian Electricity Market Operator-COES
id REVPUCP_d84c40b7becff1be3469875001913d4f
oai_identifier_str oai:revistaspuc:article/29631
network_acronym_str REVPUCP
network_name_str Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
repository_id_str
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 Period
Arbitrajes contra las decisiones del operador del mercado eléctrico peruano – COES. Análisis de los laudos arbitrales expedidos en el período 2010-2023
title Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 Period
spellingShingle Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 Period
Leyva Flores, Ricardo
Derecho de la Energía
Electricidad
Arbitrajes
Regulación de Servicios Públicos
Operador del Mercado Eléctrico Peruano – COES
Energy Law
Electricity
Arbitrations
Utilities Regulation
Peruvian Electricity Market Operator-COES
title_short Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 Period
title_full Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 Period
title_fullStr Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 Period
title_full_unstemmed Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 Period
title_sort Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 Period
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Leyva Flores, Ricardo
author Leyva Flores, Ricardo
author_facet Leyva Flores, Ricardo
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Derecho de la Energía
Electricidad
Arbitrajes
Regulación de Servicios Públicos
Operador del Mercado Eléctrico Peruano – COES
Energy Law
Electricity
Arbitrations
Utilities Regulation
Peruvian Electricity Market Operator-COES
topic Derecho de la Energía
Electricidad
Arbitrajes
Regulación de Servicios Públicos
Operador del Mercado Eléctrico Peruano – COES
Energy Law
Electricity
Arbitrations
Utilities Regulation
Peruvian Electricity Market Operator-COES
description The Peruvian electricity market operator is COES, it is a private company under public law, composed and governed by generators, transmitters, distributors, and the Free Users. The Board of Directors, which is the final authority, makes its decisions without any government intervention. Disagreements with COES decisions are resolved through Arbitration at Law or Arbitration of Conscience. Peru has a significant arbitration practice against the electricity market operator decisions (COES). This is evidenced by the Awards issued during the period 2010-2023. The purpose of this paper is to analyze this practice, focusing on those discussions that may be useful for implementing improvements in dispute resolution mechanisms in the electricity sector (such as the implementation of permanent tribunals), something which could be worthy for other markets as well. At the time of the decision, the arbitrators exercise full jurisdiction; therefore, they have the power to resolve the dispute definitively, even if the COES has not made a substantive statement when issuing its decisions. However, tribunals cannot issue general guidelines, binding precedents or condition the issuance of future COES decisions, which affects the uniformity of awards, as we have seen throughout this article. The main problem found is the lack of uniformity, and it could be explained in the conformation of the tribunals (case-by-case basis) and the broad criterion employed in Arbitrations of Conscience, where arbitrators are allowed to omit the legal framework. Other relevant problems are also analyzed.
publishDate 2024
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2024-09-20
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechoysociedad/article/view/29631
10.18800/dys.202401.007
url http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechoysociedad/article/view/29631
identifier_str_mv 10.18800/dys.202401.007
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechoysociedad/article/view/29631/26738
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Derecho & Sociedad; Núm. 62 (2024): Derecho Médico; 1-16
2521-599X
2079-3634
reponame:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
instname:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
instacron:PUCP
instname_str Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
instacron_str PUCP
institution PUCP
reponame_str Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
collection Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1840900438742794240
spelling Arbitrations against Decisions of the Peruvian Electricity Market Operator - COES. Analysis of Arbitration Awards Issued in the 2010-2023 PeriodArbitrajes contra las decisiones del operador del mercado eléctrico peruano – COES. Análisis de los laudos arbitrales expedidos en el período 2010-2023Leyva Flores, RicardoDerecho de la EnergíaElectricidadArbitrajesRegulación de Servicios PúblicosOperador del Mercado Eléctrico Peruano – COESEnergy LawElectricityArbitrationsUtilities RegulationPeruvian Electricity Market Operator-COESThe Peruvian electricity market operator is COES, it is a private company under public law, composed and governed by generators, transmitters, distributors, and the Free Users. The Board of Directors, which is the final authority, makes its decisions without any government intervention. Disagreements with COES decisions are resolved through Arbitration at Law or Arbitration of Conscience. Peru has a significant arbitration practice against the electricity market operator decisions (COES). This is evidenced by the Awards issued during the period 2010-2023. The purpose of this paper is to analyze this practice, focusing on those discussions that may be useful for implementing improvements in dispute resolution mechanisms in the electricity sector (such as the implementation of permanent tribunals), something which could be worthy for other markets as well. At the time of the decision, the arbitrators exercise full jurisdiction; therefore, they have the power to resolve the dispute definitively, even if the COES has not made a substantive statement when issuing its decisions. However, tribunals cannot issue general guidelines, binding precedents or condition the issuance of future COES decisions, which affects the uniformity of awards, as we have seen throughout this article. The main problem found is the lack of uniformity, and it could be explained in the conformation of the tribunals (case-by-case basis) and the broad criterion employed in Arbitrations of Conscience, where arbitrators are allowed to omit the legal framework. Other relevant problems are also analyzed.El operador del mercado eléctrico peruano es el COES, que es una empresa privada de Derecho Público, conformado y gobernado por los generadores, transmisores, distribuidores y los Usuarios Libres, para lo cual, el Directorio, que es su última instancia, toma sus decisiones sin intervención estatal. Las discrepancias contra las decisiones del COES se resuelven mediante Arbitrajes de Derecho o Arbitrajes de Conciencia. El Perú tiene una importante práctica arbitral contra las decisiones del operador del mercado eléctrico (COES). Esto se evidencia de los laudos arbitrales emitidos durante el periodo 2010-2023. El propósito de este artículo es analizar esta práctica, centrándose en aquellas discusiones que pueden ser útiles para implementar mejoras en los mecanismos de resolución de disputas en el sector eléctrico (tal como la creación de tribunales permanentes), algo que podría ser valioso también para otros mercados. Los árbitros al momento de resolver ejercen plena jurisdicción, por lo que tienen la atribución de resolver la disputa de manera definitiva, aun cuando el COES al emitir sus decisiones no haya emitido un pronunciamiento de fondo. No obstante, los árbitros no pueden emitir lineamientos generales, precedentes vinculantes ni condicionar la expedición de futuras decisiones del COES, lo cual afecta la uniformidad en los laudos, conforme hemos visto a lo largo del presente artículo. De esta manera, el principal problema encontrado es la falta de uniformidad, y podría explicarse en la conformación de los tribunales, que se realiza caso por caso, y el amplio criterio empleado en los Arbitrajes de Conciencia, donde los árbitros se encuentran permitidos a inaplicar el marco jurídico. También se analizan otros problemas relevantes.Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú2024-09-20info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechoysociedad/article/view/2963110.18800/dys.202401.007Derecho & Sociedad; Núm. 62 (2024): Derecho Médico; 1-162521-599X2079-3634reponame:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perúinstname:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perúinstacron:PUCPspahttp://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechoysociedad/article/view/29631/26738http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:revistaspuc:article/296312024-12-02T16:51:51Z
score 12.87381
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).