Vicisitudes en el tratamiento del daño moral por la jurisprudencia laboral peruana
The ideal of Legal certainty seems to elude us because of divergent and heterogeneous case law. In Peruvian labour case law, ruling of non-pecuniary damage cases often deviates from precedent criteria; thus, there is no safe criterion in maƩ ers such as –for example– its specific elements, or when d...
Gorde:
| Egile nagusia: | |
|---|---|
| Formatua: | Artikulua |
| Hizkuntza: | Gaztelania |
| Argitaratua: |
2019
|
| Gaiak: | |
| Sarrera elektronikoa: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=7448820 |
| Baliabidea: | THEMIS: Revista de Derecho, ISSN 2410-9592, Nº. 75, 2019, pags. 187-202 |
| Etiketak: |
Etiketa erantsi
Etiketarik gabe: Izan zaitez lehena erregistro honi etiketa jartzen
|
| Laburpena: |
The ideal of Legal certainty seems to elude us because of divergent and heterogeneous case law. In Peruvian labour case law, ruling of non-pecuniary damage cases often deviates from precedent criteria; thus, there is no safe criterion in maƩ ers such as –for example– its specific elements, or when does someone is obliged to prove it or when presumptions are available.This article aims to highlight the lack of stability among the non-pecuniary damage labour case law ruling criteria. The author begins by introducing the concept and premises of non-pecuniary damage from tort law theory. Furthermore, the author refl ects on Peruvian labour case law ruling criteria referred to compensation for non-pecuniary damage in the context of arbitrary, uncaused or fraudulent dismissal. At last, the author delves on the need of adhering to precedent criteria for the ruling of non-pecuniary damage cases |
|---|