EXP. No.
06000-2009-PA/TC
MARCOS LIMA VERA CASTRO
JUDGEMENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
In Lima, the 21 th day of September 2010, the Second Chamber of the Constitutional Court, composed by Mesia Magistrates Ramírez, Hayen and Eto Cross Street, made the following statement
SUBJECT
Appeal lodged a constitutional tort by Don Marcos Vera Castro against the decision issued by the Fourth Civil Division of the Superior Court of Lima, 103 pages, date July 15, 2009, which dismissed the demand for cars.
BACKGROUND On February 20, 2009, Don Marcos Vera Castro demand brought against the company under DOE RUN PERU SRL - Cobriza Division, in order to replace it in your workplace, and that it included in the payroll of the mining company. Further requests to cease the violation of their fundamental rights to work and to protection against arbitrary dismissal.
Prime Constitutional Court of Lima, on 25 February 2009, dismissed the claim, finding that its elucidation requires the action of several forms of evidence, it is not possible in the process of protection, because it lacks probative station, so that the constitutional process is not suitable for defense of the right allegedly violated.
reviewing The Board upheld the appeal on similar grounds. BASICS
1. According to the criteria procedurability of demands relating to employment under private individual, set in the grounds 7 to 20 STC No. 0206-2005-PA/TC, which constitute binding precedent, the Court considers that, this case, it is appropriate carry out checks on arbitrary dismissal.
2. The plaintiff argues that under the principle of the primacy of reality, the relationship he had with the defendant was a labor-related, and therefore could not be dismissed but for just cause. He claims that he worked for Empresa Minera del Peru SA Centre (Centromin PERU SA) from 1983 to 1997, and subsequently, when that company was acquired by DOE RUN PERU SRL, worked in the Division Cobriza, highlighted by various labor intermediation between those that have SEMELEC SA (01/01/1998 to 10/01/1999), M & JAKELL'S SAC (11/01/1999 to 31/08/2005), UNION PERU SAC (01/09/2005 to 31/10/2006), TEI PATRUVI SERVICE SRL (01/11/2006 to 30/04/2008) G & N ROJAS SA (01 / 05/2008 to 30/12/2008).
3. In this sense, the dispute centers on whether, under the principle of the primacy of reality, the appellant's employment can be considered as a contract of indefinite duration, and attention to it, determine whether the applicant only could be fired for cause relating to your conduct or work capacity.
4. With regard to the principle of the primacy of reality, which is implicit in our ordenamiento jurídico y, concretamente, impuesto por la propia naturaleza tuitiva de nuestra Constitución, este Colegiado ha precisado que en mérito de este principio “(...) en caso de discordancia entre lo que ocurre en la práctica y lo que fluye de los documentos, debe darse preferencia a lo primero, es decir, a lo que sucede en el terreno de los hechos”. (Fundamento 3 de la STC N.° 1944-2002-AA/TC).
5. Mediante acta de infracción (desnaturalización de la intermediación laboral) a razón de las actuaciones inspectivas realizadas según Orden de Inspección N.º 0100-2007-DNIT, corriente a fojas 52 a 65, se resolvió incluir en la planilla de la empresa usuaria (DOE RUN PERU SRL) to 182 of the 240 workers highlighted by the brokerage firm PATRUVI TEI SERV. SCRL ADVISORS CONSULTANTS, safeguarding the right of the 58 remaining to enforce it in the proper channels, because there were no present in the route taken, not possible to determine accurate labor data in order to apply the principle of the primacy of reality.
6. In this sense DOE RUN PERU SRL ordered the addition to its payroll of 180 workers (2 workers less ordered due to a duplication of their names.) Subsequently made inspective other action arising from the Inspection Order No. 220-2008-DRTE-HVCA., Current a fojas 68 a 75, con el fin de verificar la situación de 14 trabajadores que se encontraban en la misma situación laboral que los trabajadores incluidos en planilla, toda vez que no fueron considerados porque no se encontraron en el momento de la inspección (debido a que se encontraban en sus días libres, descanso médico, vacaciones) o porque habiendo sido partícipes de la visita inspectiva, no habían sido incluidos.
7. Dicha inspección concluyó que los 14 trabajadores, dentro de los cuales se encuentra el demandante, deben ser incluidos en la planilla de la empresa usuaria, en mérito a que desarrollan actividades o labores de ejecución permanente y sin cuya ejecución se afectaría y/o interrumpiría operation and development of the undertaking, as set out in Law No. 27626, section 3, assumptions of source of labor mediation: "The job placement involving staff working in the workplace or client company's operations is appropriate only for compelling cases of temporary, complementarity and specialization. Workers within the client company can not provide services involving permanent implementation of the core business of the company, "and Article 11.2, which states:" The complementary service companies are those that emphasize his personal legal to third parties called users to develop activities ancillary or unrelated to the business thereof. "
8. In this sense, applying the principle of the primacy of reality, the relationship of appellant with DOE RUN PERU SRL was a labor and indeterminate nature, and any employer's decision to terminate it could only be sustained by a just cause established by duly established by law and otherwise arbitrary dismissal would be configured, as has happened in this case.
9. Finally, the school considers that the breach of this employment relationship set arbitrary dismissal, for which, taking into account the purpose of the process for recovery under constitutional, it must be the reinstatement of the plaintiff in the workplace coming mister to the date on which the violation occurred of their fundamental rights.
For these reasons, the Constitutional Court with the authority under the Constitution of Peru
RESOLVED 1. Upheld the request for defense for having established the infringement of the right to work.
2. ORDER meets the reset located at Don Marcos Vera Castro in the position he occupied or other similar incluyéndosele the payroll of the respondent and regarding it as a worker subject to an employment relationship indefinite period, with the payment of costs and process costs. Published and notifíquese
.
SS. MESSIAH
RAMIREZ STREET CROSS Hayen
ETO
06000-2009-PA/TC
MARCOS LIMA VERA CASTRO
JUDGEMENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
In Lima, the 21 th day of September 2010, the Second Chamber of the Constitutional Court, composed by Mesia Magistrates Ramírez, Hayen and Eto Cross Street, made the following statement
SUBJECT
Appeal lodged a constitutional tort by Don Marcos Vera Castro against the decision issued by the Fourth Civil Division of the Superior Court of Lima, 103 pages, date July 15, 2009, which dismissed the demand for cars.
BACKGROUND On February 20, 2009, Don Marcos Vera Castro demand brought against the company under DOE RUN PERU SRL - Cobriza Division, in order to replace it in your workplace, and that it included in the payroll of the mining company. Further requests to cease the violation of their fundamental rights to work and to protection against arbitrary dismissal.
Prime Constitutional Court of Lima, on 25 February 2009, dismissed the claim, finding that its elucidation requires the action of several forms of evidence, it is not possible in the process of protection, because it lacks probative station, so that the constitutional process is not suitable for defense of the right allegedly violated.
reviewing The Board upheld the appeal on similar grounds. BASICS
1. According to the criteria procedurability of demands relating to employment under private individual, set in the grounds 7 to 20 STC No. 0206-2005-PA/TC, which constitute binding precedent, the Court considers that, this case, it is appropriate carry out checks on arbitrary dismissal.
2. The plaintiff argues that under the principle of the primacy of reality, the relationship he had with the defendant was a labor-related, and therefore could not be dismissed but for just cause. He claims that he worked for Empresa Minera del Peru SA Centre (Centromin PERU SA) from 1983 to 1997, and subsequently, when that company was acquired by DOE RUN PERU SRL, worked in the Division Cobriza, highlighted by various labor intermediation between those that have SEMELEC SA (01/01/1998 to 10/01/1999), M & JAKELL'S SAC (11/01/1999 to 31/08/2005), UNION PERU SAC (01/09/2005 to 31/10/2006), TEI PATRUVI SERVICE SRL (01/11/2006 to 30/04/2008) G & N ROJAS SA (01 / 05/2008 to 30/12/2008).
3. In this sense, the dispute centers on whether, under the principle of the primacy of reality, the appellant's employment can be considered as a contract of indefinite duration, and attention to it, determine whether the applicant only could be fired for cause relating to your conduct or work capacity.
4. With regard to the principle of the primacy of reality, which is implicit in our ordenamiento jurídico y, concretamente, impuesto por la propia naturaleza tuitiva de nuestra Constitución, este Colegiado ha precisado que en mérito de este principio “(...) en caso de discordancia entre lo que ocurre en la práctica y lo que fluye de los documentos, debe darse preferencia a lo primero, es decir, a lo que sucede en el terreno de los hechos”. (Fundamento 3 de la STC N.° 1944-2002-AA/TC).
5. Mediante acta de infracción (desnaturalización de la intermediación laboral) a razón de las actuaciones inspectivas realizadas según Orden de Inspección N.º 0100-2007-DNIT, corriente a fojas 52 a 65, se resolvió incluir en la planilla de la empresa usuaria (DOE RUN PERU SRL) to 182 of the 240 workers highlighted by the brokerage firm PATRUVI TEI SERV. SCRL ADVISORS CONSULTANTS, safeguarding the right of the 58 remaining to enforce it in the proper channels, because there were no present in the route taken, not possible to determine accurate labor data in order to apply the principle of the primacy of reality.
6. In this sense DOE RUN PERU SRL ordered the addition to its payroll of 180 workers (2 workers less ordered due to a duplication of their names.) Subsequently made inspective other action arising from the Inspection Order No. 220-2008-DRTE-HVCA., Current a fojas 68 a 75, con el fin de verificar la situación de 14 trabajadores que se encontraban en la misma situación laboral que los trabajadores incluidos en planilla, toda vez que no fueron considerados porque no se encontraron en el momento de la inspección (debido a que se encontraban en sus días libres, descanso médico, vacaciones) o porque habiendo sido partícipes de la visita inspectiva, no habían sido incluidos.
7. Dicha inspección concluyó que los 14 trabajadores, dentro de los cuales se encuentra el demandante, deben ser incluidos en la planilla de la empresa usuaria, en mérito a que desarrollan actividades o labores de ejecución permanente y sin cuya ejecución se afectaría y/o interrumpiría operation and development of the undertaking, as set out in Law No. 27626, section 3, assumptions of source of labor mediation: "The job placement involving staff working in the workplace or client company's operations is appropriate only for compelling cases of temporary, complementarity and specialization. Workers within the client company can not provide services involving permanent implementation of the core business of the company, "and Article 11.2, which states:" The complementary service companies are those that emphasize his personal legal to third parties called users to develop activities ancillary or unrelated to the business thereof. "
8. In this sense, applying the principle of the primacy of reality, the relationship of appellant with DOE RUN PERU SRL was a labor and indeterminate nature, and any employer's decision to terminate it could only be sustained by a just cause established by duly established by law and otherwise arbitrary dismissal would be configured, as has happened in this case.
9. Finally, the school considers that the breach of this employment relationship set arbitrary dismissal, for which, taking into account the purpose of the process for recovery under constitutional, it must be the reinstatement of the plaintiff in the workplace coming mister to the date on which the violation occurred of their fundamental rights.
For these reasons, the Constitutional Court with the authority under the Constitution of Peru
RESOLVED 1. Upheld the request for defense for having established the infringement of the right to work.
2. ORDER meets the reset located at Don Marcos Vera Castro in the position he occupied or other similar incluyéndosele the payroll of the respondent and regarding it as a worker subject to an employment relationship indefinite period, with the payment of costs and process costs. Published and notifíquese
.
SS. MESSIAH
RAMIREZ STREET CROSS Hayen
ETO
0 comments:
Post a Comment