After being witness in 2 court cases related to alimony, one of them about one of my sponsors who works at the Central Bank of Peru and another to litigate against a colleague who was defending his client that belongs to the National Police of Peru, I noting that it appears that some employers in some cases are intimidated by court orders, in spite that these employers have their respective legal departments, and is the reason that I chose to ask the question "Employers must abide by all injunction? especially if most of my readers to make natural and legal persons who live in Peru, who wish to learn more about myself before becoming a defense lawyer, in this regard, I make it clear that although Article 139, paragraph 2 of our 1993 Constitution states that " any authority ... ... may rescind resolutions that have last res judicata, or squeezing out proceedings pending or modify judgments or delay their execution ... " and Article 4 of the Organic Law of Judicial Power states that " Every person and authority is obliged to abide by and comply with judicial decisions or administrative, ... unable to describe its content or their foundations, or interpret their effects restrict its scope in civil, criminal or administrative law says ... ", it is also true that our letter existing policy Article 51 states that" The Constitution takes precedence over any statute, the Act on the rules of lesser rank and so on ..."; IE, there is a hierarchy or prevalence in our legal in this regard, the Judge and any natural person or authority legal, they must strictly obey our Constitution and who acts contrary to it, has no legitimacy, nor was he owes obedience; this coupled with the fact that the Fourth Final and Transitory Provision of our Constitution bounded, states that " The rules relating to rights and freedoms that the Constitution shall be construed in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and with international treaties and agreements thereon ratified by Peru "; this in accordance with Article 55 of our current policy letter, and after all this introduction, step to motivate the subject matter of comment legal, which is referred to Article 648 paragraph 6 of our Code of Civil Procedure , in principle provides that assets are indefeasible " Pay and pensions do not exceed five units Procedure Reference . The excess is attachable to a third party.
When it comes to ensuring maintenance obligations But proceed to the sixty percent of total revenue, with the single deduction of statutory deductions "namely the one hand, NO EMPLOYEE SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO YOUR EMPLOYER , which is appropriate to Discount More than 60% of your total monthly child support for the concept, because it means endorsing an obvious an abuse of , and for being outlawed by our current legal system, given that you have rights you should respect, not only as an employee, but above all for being a person and specialized legal counsel, to enforce them know ; also No employer shall THREATENED WITH an injunction that requires it to proceed to deduct a certain percentage of the monthly salary of an employee , since although a court may have issued a statement given food, whether or not they have quality res judicata or point tentatively anticipated allocation of food, said injunction reflects a certain reality that introduced him to the plaintiff or the court has been some reality in the court file, HOWEVER, the employer is through its department of economics and accounting and legal area, who know exactly if a certain employee is suffering or not, judicial discounts by way of alimony therefore up to him, direct that employees will only be deducted up to 60% of the total monthly salary employees receive, for reasons of maintenance, being authorized by law and thus avoid being hit with legal action free of civil, criminal or employment to promote their employees against their employers, and in any case, given that the court orders that contain court orders discount on the credit of employees you should follow in chronological order according to their reception by the employer, all of which must be fulfilled only to the allowable percentage by law, and according to the above mentioned, HOWEVER, if any percentage balances that exceed the percentage establceido by law, employers must give notice to the courts asked them to proceed to the withholding or reduction ordered by their respective courts, informing the why can not fully comply with these injunctions, in order that these courts proceed to make known to the litigants involved, to take the appropriate legal ations only forced to go against the pension food, without prejudice to the worker to promote its judicial process of assessment for reasons of legal interest.
DR. HIDALGO VALERIANO MAMANI
JR. Of 338 ICA. 218 Cercado de Lima
FONO: 4281618 - CELL: 999853358
0 comments:
Post a Comment