Sistema Regional de Información
en línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina,
el Caribe, España y Portugal

Disrupción, Economía Compartida y Derecho. AA.VV., Gustavo Gauthier (Coordinador), Fundación de Cultura Universitaria, Montevideo, 2016 (168 págs.). Estudios de Derecho Laboral en Homenaje al Profesor Octavio Racciatti. AA.VV., Jorge Rosenbaum (Coordinador), Fundación de Cultura Universitaria, Montevideo, 2017 (272 págs.). Schwab, Klaus. La cuarta revolución industrial. Editorial Debate, 2016, Barcelona (217 págs.).

La reforma laboral brasileña ha dado motivo para volver sobre los temas de flexibilidad y la desregulación del Derecho del Trabajo, que habían quedado algo relegados luego de más de una década de políticas laborales de signo tutelar. El autor repasa los términos más generales del debate mediante una bibliografía variada e interdisciplinar, para luego concentrarse en los perfiles más singulares de la ley brasileña

La Fundación Electra tiene por objeto fomentar y promover, por cualquier medio apropiado, el estudio científico del Derecho del Trabajo y de la SeguridadSocial. A tales efectos, podrá otorgar premios, becas y toda forma de apoyo económico para la participación en cursos, seminarios, congresos, maestrías, doctorados y especializaciones en la disciplina. También podrá organizar o participar en la organización de cualesquiera de tales actividades. Podrá, asimismo, publicar o apoyar la publicación de monografías, tesis, libros, revistas y otros medios de divulgación de estudios de Derecho del Trabajo y de la Seguridad Social. También podrá crear o apoyar la creación de archivos y bases de datos, así como asumir toda otra forma de apoyo a la enseñanza y divulgación de la regulación del trabajo y de la seguridad social. De igual modo, la Fundación podrá apoyar, fomentar y promover cualquier otro tipo de actividad científica, artística y cultural que no tenga fines de lucro.

Leyes - Decretos - Resoluciones - Consejos de salarios

VALORES DE INTERÉS

Thanks to Severan jurists’ testimonies collected in the Digest, we know that the appeal eligibility was conditioned by the «a quo» judge’s analysis of the respect of the prescribed terms and formalities and the nature of the contested measure. Against the possible refusal of the first instance judge, the parties were given the opportunity to take their case to the «ad quem» judge, who could confirm the decision and give way to the implementation of the judgment, or accept the part’s motion and proceed to the examination of the merits of the case. The Draft of the Model Civil Procedure Code for Ibero-America (texto del anteproyecto del Código Procesal Civil Modelo para Iberoamérica) follows, on the subject of appeal, Roman discipline faithfully, as regards both the «a quo» judge’s role and the possibility of contesting the latter’s decision before the «ad quem» judge through the complaint (recurso de queja). The strong Roman stamp also arises, similarly, in Peru’s Civil Procedure Code, where the right to a second court has a very incisive constitutional backing. The traditional problem to keep the justice process within reasonable time limits is closely connected with the appeal eligibility. The solution adopted by Roman Law —to take financial penalties to discourage daring appeals, filtering thus the merely delaying appeals— could represent an interesting indication for legislators, who are still grappling with the need to ensure the right, on the one hand, to appeal and to efficiency regarding the administration of justice on the other hand.

This article analyzes the so-called surprise-decision prohibition as a rule that follows from the due process of law and as an innovation of the Brazilian New Code of Civil Procedure 2015, observing its incidence. It concludes that this prohibition is part of the right of defense and therefore applicable without express legal prevision, as is the case of Peruvian law.

What is «liquidable» and how should this concept be faced by arbitrators and judges? Can an enforcement judge determine concepts such as costs, interests and/or penalties if the arbitral tribunal has not provided any parameters? What fundamental rights might be violated? In accordance with international arbitration practice, we will deal here with the problems arising from the division of functions between judges and arbitrators in relation to the enforcement of the «liquidable» concepts.

Since its appearance in Europe, the trial by jury had to travel a long path until it became the official procedure to try criminal cases in the United States. Although it was not really created with that specific purpose, over the years it experienced memorable moments in which it was granted with the prestige and value required to be inserted in the Constitution of that country, as a safeguard against the arbitrariness of the governmental power. Today, however, the great importance that it had in the past has significantly decreased. The needs and practices of a system with a particularly high rate of convictions have relegated and transformed it into a real endangered specie. The following article describes and explains its birth and rise, as well as its subsequent virtual disappearance due to the not so efficient as dangerous guilty pleas.

In this article, the issue around abandonment in judicial proceedings (Procedural abandonment) related with the imprescriptible pretensions will be analyzed, with a special mention to those relative to the right to property. The issue discussed in the National Jurisdictional Plenary of Civil Law and Civil Procedure of 2016 will be criticized. The true issue to be solved is revealed, it’s the one related to the imprescriptible pretensions as case of inappropriateness of abandonment. It raises reasons that put in question the normative provision that links the procedural abandonment with those pretensions. Precisely because of the lack of strong arguments to justify the relation, a necessary legislative amendment is proposed.