Aspects of Small Claims Procedure in Colombia: A View from the Academy

Introduction: Ths article is the result of research carried out by the research incubator ofProcedural Law of the Bucaramanga Campus of the Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia (ucc). Methodology: Analysis of certain aspects of the new small claims procedure fordeclaratory judgment, which the General...

Full description

Autores:
Tapias-Tapias, Amalia
Munóz-Sanchéz, Rafael Evelio
Latorre-Merchán, Rafael Ricardo
Tipo de recurso:
Article of journal
Fecha de publicación:
2016
Institución:
Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia
Repositorio:
Repositorio UCC
Idioma:
spa
OAI Identifier:
oai:repository.ucc.edu.co:20.500.12494/9056
Acceso en línea:
https://revistas.ucc.edu.co/index.php/di/article/view/1522
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12494/9056
Palabra clave:
Rights
openAccess
License
Derechos de autor 2016 Dixi
Description
Summary:Introduction: Ths article is the result of research carried out by the research incubator ofProcedural Law of the Bucaramanga Campus of the Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia (ucc). Methodology: Analysis of certain aspects of the new small claims procedure fordeclaratory judgment, which the General Procedure Code (cgp by its Spanish initials)successfully introduced into the legal system. Thse aspects are related to type, good faithof the creditor, exhaustion of procedural requirements, and propriety of interim measures.Th analysis was performed pursuant to Articles 419 to 421 and 590 of the cgp, Law 640 of2001, Decision C-726 of 2014 of the Constitutional Court of Colombia, and Calamandrei’stheory on small claims procedure. Results: Th legislature has shown the same proceduraltreatment to both pure and documentary small claims procedure, contrary to Calamandrei’s theory; the admission of pure small claims procedure implies that the judge supportsthe requirement of good faith payment to the creditor. In accordance with the norms onpre-trial conciliation, to initiate a small claims procedure classifid as special declaratory,the plaintif must prove compliance with the procedural requirements, that is, provideproof of having exhausted the attempt at conciliation. However, the plaintif may substitutethis with the request for and, logically, with the propriety of an interim measure, for whichsecurity must be furnished. Conclusions: In small claims procedure, the plaintif must provide proof of having exhausted procedural requirements. Finding an innominate measurein the context of small claims procedure with a view to guaranteeing the effctiveness ofthe right to credence will be a diffilt task.