Average rating
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Advisors
Solis Cordova, MarioIssue Date
2023-11-13Keywords
Tercería de propiedadCasación
Hipoteca
Contrato de compraventa
Third party non-onwnership claim
Cassation
mortgage
Contract of sale
Metadata
Show full item recordOther Titles
Third party non-onwnership claim Judgment in cassation 4873- 2017 LimaAbstract
En el presente trabajo se analizará la sentencia casatorio N° 4873- 2017 Lima sobre la tercería de propiedad. Debiendo tener presente en el análisis, que la finalidad de la casación es la correcta aplicación e interpretación de la norma para el desarrollo del caso. En este contexto, el Banco BBVA pretendió que se declare la tercería de un inmueble de su propiedad que fue objeto de hipoteca previa, mediante una demanda contra Inversiones 7 de Agosto y RTM Inversiones. el demandante solicita no verse afectado de la hipoteca inscrita en el predio matriz. El demandante adquirió mediante un documento de fecha cierta el local 1 y el sótano, no obstante, no se realizó la respectiva inscripción, debido que el predio matriz no se encontraba independizado. Es así que, se analizará temas como la tercería de propiedad, la inscripción y el levantamiento de la hipoteca, contrato de compraventa, entre otros.In this work we will analyze the cassation judgment Nª 4873- 2017 Lima on third party non-onwnership claim. It should be borne in mind in the analysis, that the purpose of the appeal is the correct application and interpretation of the rule for the conduct of the case. Consequently, the Bank BBVA has pretended that the third party non-onwnership claim of its property that was the object of the previous mortgage, by means of a lawsuit against Investments 7 of August and RTM Investments. the plaintiff requests not to be affected by the mortgage registered on the parent property. The plaintiff acquired premises 1 and the basement by a certain date document, however, the respective registration was not made, because the parent property was not independent. Therefore, we will analyze issues such as third party non-onwnership claim, registration and the lifting of the mortgage, contract of sale, among others.
Type
info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesisRights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLanguage
spaCollections


