Not everything is precautionary: towards a typification of different figures in comparative perspective
This article presents and distinguishes measures that were traditionally all located within the precautionary genre, but that in recent years have attempted to be identified with greater precision. The distinction between these measures is relevant, among other reasons because their requirements are...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | Perú |
| Institución: | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
| Repositorio: | Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
| Idioma: | español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/29558 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/iusetveritas/article/view/29558 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Medida cautelar Medida anticipativa Medida asegurativa de prueba Medida autosatisfactiva Derecho Procesal Sistema jurídico uruguayo Precautionary measure Anticipatory measure Proof assurance measure Self-satisfactory measure Procedural Law Uruguayan Legal System |
| Sumario: | This article presents and distinguishes measures that were traditionally all located within the precautionary genre, but that in recent years have attempted to be identified with greater precision. The distinction between these measures is relevant, among other reasons because their requirements are not identical, not all of them are admitted in the same cases and the procedure to adopt them must be different, for clearly justified reasons. The topic is approached in an exploratory manner, based on the selection of the Peruvian and Uruguayan systems. |
|---|