Dr. Marybell Jara, explains from the analysis of a concrete case, how the instances of ordinary justice, including the Supreme Court, differ in their criteria to identify a contractual and a tort liability. He asserts that confusing rulings affect the application of the law, which represents a danger for the litigant.
It is not difficult to find cassation rulings in which the Supreme Court opts for the unification of civil liability regimes (contractual and tort), hereinafter SRC.
However, the particularities of the decision contained in Cassation N° 3449-2014-Ica, published on 30-03-16 and issued by the Transitory Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, make it worthy of comment, as they show the real labyrinth in which a justiciable finds himself in the Judiciary when it comes to determine the CRS to be applied in the specific case.
To see the entire article click on the following link: http://goo.gl/W1HvJ8
