El caso del despido indirecto y la suspensión del plazo: ¿interpretación o creación judicial del derecho?

Luis A. Silva Irarrázaval

doi:10.4067/S0718-00122019000200433

El caso del despido indirecto y la suspensión del plazo: ¿interpretación o creación judicial del derecho?

Título traducido de la contribución: Interpreting or creating the law? : a critical approach to the judicial understanding of section 171 of the Labor Code

Luis A. Silva Irarrázaval

Facultad de Derecho

Producción científica: Contribución a una revista › Artículo › revisión exhaustiva

2 Citas (Scopus)

14 Descargas (Pure)

Resumen

n este artículo se sostiene críticamente que la aplicación que los tribunales hacen de la regla del artículo 168, inciso final, del Código del Trabajo al supuesto del despido indirecto (artículo 171), no es resultado de una tarea hermenéutica, sino creadora del derecho. Al amparo del principio protector del derecho laboral, los jueces modifican la valoración de los supuestos fácticos hecha por el legislador al momento de dictar la ley. De este modo, los jueces se erigen ellos mismos en legisladores.

Título traducido de la contribución	Interpreting or creating the law? : a critical approach to the judicial understanding of section 171 of the Labor Code
Idioma original	Español
Páginas (desde-hasta)	433-458
Número de páginas	26
Publicación	Ius et Praxis
Volumen	25
N.º	2
DOI	https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-00122019000200433
Estado	Publicada - 12 ago. 2019

Nota bibliográfica

Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Universidad de Talca.

Palabras clave

Integración del derecho
interpretación de la ley
despido laboral

Acceder al documento

10.4067/S0718-00122019000200433

http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0718-00122019000200433&lng=es&tlng=es

Citar esto

@article{5a4b6efa78774cb4b317e6f5b2f9a286,

title = "El caso del despido indirecto y la suspensi{\'o}n del plazo: ¿interpretaci{\'o}n o creaci{\'o}n judicial del derecho?",

abstract = "Abstract The purpose of this paper is to analyze a Labor case law which consists in the extension of a rule of section 168 final paragraph of the Labor Code to a different hypothetical, that of section 171. It states that judicial enforcement of section 168{\textquoteright}s rule to those situations covered by section 171 ensues not as the product of judicial interpretation but as an outcome of judicial activism. Under the claim that they are applying a central principle of Labor Law, judges alter legislator{\textquoteright}s intent by attaching a different juridical value to factual premises underlying the legal text. By this fashion, judges become legislators themselves.",

keywords = "LAW, Integration of the law, statutory interpretation, dismissal, Integraci{\'o}n del derecho, interpretaci{\'o}n de la ley, despido laboral",

author = "{Silva Irarr{\'a}zaval}, {Luis A.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019 Universidad de Talca.",

year = "2019",

month = aug,

day = "12",

doi = "10.4067/S0718-00122019000200433",

language = "Spanish",

volume = "25",

pages = "433--458",

journal = "Ius et Praxis",

issn = "0717-2877",

publisher = "Universidad de Talca",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - El caso del despido indirecto y la suspensión del plazo

T2 - ¿interpretación o creación judicial del derecho?

AU - Silva Irarrázaval, Luis A.

PY - 2019/8/12

Y1 - 2019/8/12

N2 - Abstract The purpose of this paper is to analyze a Labor case law which consists in the extension of a rule of section 168 final paragraph of the Labor Code to a different hypothetical, that of section 171. It states that judicial enforcement of section 168’s rule to those situations covered by section 171 ensues not as the product of judicial interpretation but as an outcome of judicial activism. Under the claim that they are applying a central principle of Labor Law, judges alter legislator’s intent by attaching a different juridical value to factual premises underlying the legal text. By this fashion, judges become legislators themselves.

AB - Abstract The purpose of this paper is to analyze a Labor case law which consists in the extension of a rule of section 168 final paragraph of the Labor Code to a different hypothetical, that of section 171. It states that judicial enforcement of section 168’s rule to those situations covered by section 171 ensues not as the product of judicial interpretation but as an outcome of judicial activism. Under the claim that they are applying a central principle of Labor Law, judges alter legislator’s intent by attaching a different juridical value to factual premises underlying the legal text. By this fashion, judges become legislators themselves.

KW - LAW

KW - Integration of the law

KW - statutory interpretation

KW - dismissal

KW - Integración del derecho

KW - interpretación de la ley

KW - despido laboral

U2 - 10.4067/S0718-00122019000200433

DO - 10.4067/S0718-00122019000200433

M3 - Article

SN - 0717-2877

VL - 25

SP - 433

EP - 458

JO - Ius et Praxis

JF - Ius et Praxis

IS - 2

ER -

El caso del despido indirecto y la suspensión del plazo: ¿interpretación o creación judicial del derecho?

Resumen

Nota bibliográfica

Palabras clave

Acceder al documento

Huella

Citar esto