Natural Oestrogen Cream

A book on the consumer ... that the consumer fraud

law say that everything is debatable. May be true, may not. If someone writes a legal evil thing must face the consequences, that is, critical articles, reviews, more or lower level of sales, and even concepts that every reader is about the author.

However, this is a bit different to offer a book that seeks to discuss or analyze an entire legislative body and, finally, practice is limited to play the legal text in the commentary. It appears that the softness in researching and writing and is very common in the law books. In this respect, is known for an author who has the largest number of books published on civil procedural law, but that 90% of the text across all books come to be textual references.

For example, if I buy a book that promises to analyze the new Code and Consumer Protection, I hope to find reflections with a minimum quality that can properly illustrate the complex issues that regulates the new rules. Sure, I can not be so demanding: how is it possible that in less than two months displayed a good book on the subject (the Code was published in early September)? Still, I decided to browse the book "Analysis of the Code of Consumer Protection and Defense", authored by Steven Carbonell O'Brien, with the firm conviction alas! buy.

But great was my surprise when I place the issue of unfair terms (Art. 49 to 52) and note how the author, the commentary of the article, reproduced in full the text and then ... Paraphrases! But come, I thought, must be given another chance. I checked the index and went to page 150 to read what they had developed on the issue of GMOs (especially on a recent and widely criticized Indecopi jurisprudence on the subject), but my indignation was greater: the approach to the issue is totally insecure, lacking in support and above, it appears that the author wants to make fun of readers. I transcribe the beginning of the commentary on Article 37 on the labeling of genetically modified foods, which literally says

"foods that include genetically modified components should be labeled."

Okay. And the commentary says

"The review article states that incorporating foods genetically modified components should indicate on their labels.

is, food that has been genetically modified must be indicated on product labels. To prevent consumers from being misled.

However, it How can you ask convincingly demonstrate that a product incorporating such an element?

Proving it would be very difficult because the country does not exist or laboratory tools to establish and certify whether a product is trnasgénico or not.

Therefore, we can only rely on the good faith and loyalty providers believe in the product labeling and marking, as we established the good faith belief consumers

(...)" (sic) .

This was too much for me. How is it possible that someone could seriously publish this? It's a joke, is an insult to the reader who has already gone through the primary of any school. It is indeed a book about the consumer but the consumer fraud that is acquired. And the editorial (which is Legal Publishers) is not saved. Could it be that can publish a monumental book of Guido Alpa and at the same time, this manual as primary? What do you want? Is it any wonder consumers before anyone else publishing a book on the new Code? Lords of Legal Editors: No pass, then. Law is good that everything is debatable, but with a minimum quality please. Below that level can not get something to market.

Well, fortunately I did not pay the 70 soles that might be the worst spent my entire life.

Cokies Para Mega Upload

Open Letter to Mr. Carlos Mesia Ramírez

Lima, October 20, 2010

Ramírez Carlos Mesia

President of the Constitutional Court of Peru

Lord Messiah:

I have read your release published today on the website of the Constitutional Court, in which answers some questions made by the Institute of Defense Legal (IDL). After reflecting on his position, I decided to write a short letter is not intended that you read it, much less bother to answer, but with the sole purpose of saying what I think and feel that has left me with attitude, not only now but for several years, a view which is based in my capacity as a citizen and expressed in the exercise of my constitutional rights.

First Lord Messiah, I must say that I share with many of the legal criteria nor with what he thinks of the Court presiding. For example, I do not think a penalty of $ 36 million would affect the right to property This was an argument for invalidating his award. I do not think it can be argued that judicial decisions that deviate from precedents of the Court are null and void, because such invalidity shall not exist in public law.

Fewer still believe it is legally correct to argue that the precedent of mandatory binding on judges to the point that they have no chance to depart, as there is the figure of Distinguishing , which is part of the theory of stare decisis which was incorporated in the Code of the Constitution. Also, I think you are wrong in a serious way when both constitutional norms unknown as infra to assert the will of the Tribunal, as is the case of this law that the Court should be pronounced only in respect of the decisions rejecting the habeas corpus, amparo, habeas data and compliance and not of estimatory . I totally disagree when you said that the Court's judgments are equivalent to the Constitution because concretize its precepts, this implies a destruction of the sources in Peru. Nor, Mr Mesia, I think it is appropriate that the Tribunal is engaged in interpreting wills, since this is the work of the jurisdiction (the real), and fewer still to ignore the res judicata, noting that procedural issues are Finding no merit to the school that includes you. Lord Messiah, the jeopardy is a constitutional principle. Do not forget it.

Similarly, I disagree strongly with you in the role to be assumed by the Constitutional Court in our legal system. You have said, very loose bones, which the Court directs economic policy, health, social ( Act, No. 30). This is reflected in the judgments on the morning after pill, first, and the tariff on cement, then both with their vote counting. This reflects that you are consistent with what he says and does. Personally, I would congratulate this attitude because not many people have, but I think this is a wrong approach and harmful to our rule of law. If the Constitutional Court decides on government policy, what is the role of the executive branch, Mr. Messiah? Could it be that, on the grounds of protection of fundamental rights, the Collegiate will be performing functions that is not theirs? Unfortunately, It occurs when an organ skills that do not belong, which creates a lack of distortion that must be repaired.

But the Court over which you preside is the final word in almost all disputes that arise when product nor its constituent power, the Constitution, entrusted that mission. The Court must represent a balance, not imbalance, should promote the order, not chaos. Lord Messiah, I can state unequivocally that the Court is on the verge of a coup, if you have not already given. This is the result of thinking like you do.

Finally, you may disagree with everything I have been saying so far. What surprised me and reveal otherwise you would not have played well the charge was granted. However, I do not think the solution to defend his person is the press release published today on page Constitutional Court's web. His descriptions are unconscionable and excessive unworthy of his office and are not consistent with a discussion of height, even when you perceive that the criticisms are excessive. Ad hominem arguments abound and only reflect an alarming level of arrogance and little tolerance for criticism. Professionals to brand IDL "parrots" that have an "intellectual mediocrity" or that nature has given them intelligence, or even say that there are professional enough to train judges and prosecutors, are absolutely unacceptable phrases. You say that "criticism is welcome as long as they do with decency, respect and above all, intelligence, but curiously you are the first not to do so. As for the forms, it is evident that his statement is very far from the IDL statement was the cause, and that's unfortunate.

I know it's too much to ask to change your way of thinking and acting. However, I think so I am allowed to ask for his duties as a judge of the Constitutional Court falls short of the circumstances and no longer continue to deepen the schism that has developed in the legal system. Although I have my own idea of \u200b\u200bwhat should be the future of their school (limited to constitutional and jurisdictional processes and nothing more), until the desired time is only may ask for peace and quiet.

remain, goodbye to you

Renzo Cavani Brain

Loss Of The Cervical Lordosis Means

Constitutional Court: everything has its end

The previous post on the commission of the crime of malfeasance by part of three judges of the TC, beyond which is unacceptable that people who hold the judicial function in this way are wrong, move to some reflections on the future of this school.

First, it is clear that situation can not continue. The TC has gone beyond any kind of control and its role in our legal system in recent years, has acquired overtones that are not exactly that interfere with the democratic and constitutional order, such as spraying the res judicata claim to control the tariff policy Executive or interpret a will, it is a matter entirely unrelated to their work. A sponsored impeachment by Congress can be an effective remedy, and, at this time, absolutely necessary, but it would be just to weather the storm and not to prevent future storms.

must restore balance in the legal system and, today, this can be achieved only looking for solutions that the law provides. The radical reaction would be to remove the TC off the map through a constitutional reform, but the short history of this body has shown it can become key issues of great importance, as was the case of those courageous judges who denied the constitutionality of the "law of authentic interpretation" which in the end, served to perpetuate the dictatorship of Fujimori. At that time and, especially, when those judges were reinstated years later, played TC a responsible role because its members were aware that there are powers and limits that respect. Now we are in a situation diametrically opposed.

So what to do with the TC? Here's a suggestion: restrict his powers by limiting it to be a real negative legislator (and not positive, as has been proclaimed, which is supported by some doctrine) which deals only constitutional processes and competence, all other constitutional processes must return to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Judiciary and the Supreme Court. But the essential TC is to remove the amparo, which has become a perverse mechanism by which it has made and unmade at will, a veritable sword of Damocles for the executive, the judiciary itself, Congress, arbitration courts, universities and especially individuals.

Furthermore, it has been a dramatic situation where all disputes resolved in the CT end (this place because everything is "constitutionalized"), where the binding precedent established in Constitutional Procedural Code is used as a weapon which compels judges to the judiciary to apply to exactly what it says the TC (not knowing that the figure of Distinguishing allows the judge to depart from the precedent for justifiable reasons) and, last but not least, which has promoted the destruction of any system of sources of law, the rarely argued that the judgments of the TC equivalent to the Constitution because they concretize its precepts. This being so, it is not surprising that members of this body have said that this judge to depart from its decisions, commits malfeasance (STC Exp No. 00001-2010-CC/TC, the foundation 27).

But back to our proposal. Against it may be argued, quite rightly, that the Supreme Court, as it is now, is not capable of successfully dealing with the delivery of constitutional justice. Certainly, this body has had very large declines in its history, from an almost total submission to the dictatorship in power, until the first full casatorio, in which he demonstrated how through the application of the law with impunity can also devote discrimination and injustice . However, despite all its problems, we believe that our Supreme Court is not able to create such deep cracks in the legal system such as that created the TC.

reform the justice delivery system, which should include a renewal of many Supreme Court justices, is a process that is underway and it needs to implement the necessary mechanisms to that end, the court (the real) re- acquire the prestige and legitimacy long lost. An efficient and independent judiciary, with judges trained and committed to society and the protection of the rights of individuals and, above all, a Supreme Court at the height of the circumstances, may well protect the Constitution as it should. Do not forget that a country can live without a Constitutional Court, but never without a Judiciary.

the end, you decide, the Congress-if-only dare hope that is the best in the not too distant future.

How To Write The Commercial Offer Letter

The Constitutional Tribunal of Peru transgressed! At what point

The September edition of Law (Law Gazette monthly newspaper) surprises us with a news-bomb: The Constitutional Court judges and more specifically Alvarez Miranda, Calle Hani-Urviola Hayen and solved a case with a rule repealed over 15 years!

Here I show the cover of the newspaper.

Open publication - Free publishing - More

tc

And below the page where the news unfolds.

Open publication - Free publishing - More court

The note says everything. The malfeasance is a crime and judges who have made should go to jail. But beyond the criminal sanction applied by the judiciary (after the Congress I lift the immunity through a political impeachment), this case demonstrates the absolute irresponsibility with which solves such an important organ. If they prevaricate, I can not even imagine what else they can do.

And now, what are they going to say the champions of TC? Mesia Doctor Ramirez, you have the floor.

Imitaciones Tory Burch

fucked up the TC? And the Court

Applied to the Constitutional Court is not so difficult to answer this question vargasllosiana (yes it is, however, if we speak of Peru).