{"title":"Sobre el modo de impugnar los servicios mínimos y sus lesivas consecuencias.","authors":"Antonio V. Sempere Navarro","doi":"10.55104/rjl_00423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Se discute sobre la jurisdicción competente (social o contenciosa) para impugnar los servicios mínimos fijados por la Autoridad Gubernativa. La sentencia comentada sienta dos grandes principios: 1º) Cuando se impugnen los servicios mínimos, impuestos por la autoridad gubernativa, la competencia para conocer el litigio corresponde al orden jurisdiccional contencioso-administrativo. 2º) Cuando se cuestiona un comportamiento empresarial, relacionado con la ejecución de los servicios mínimos, el conocimiento del litigio corresponde a la jurisdicción social. A su vez, esa dualidad jurisdiccional conduce a que el plazo de prescripción para reclamar en el orden social no puede activarse hasta la firmeza de la sentencia contenciosa.\nThe competent jurisdiction (social or contentious) to challenge the minimum services set by the Government Authority is discussed. The commented sentence establishes two main principles: 1º) When the minimum services imposed by the governmental authority are challenged, the competence to hear the dispute corresponds to the contentious-administrative jurisdictional order. 2º) When a business behavior is questioned, related to the execution of the minimum services, the knowledge of the litigation corresponds to the social jurisdiction. At the same time, this jurisdictional duality leads to the fact that the statute of limitations to claim in the social order cannot be activated until the finality of the contentious sentence.","PeriodicalId":291945,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Jurisprudencia Laboral","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Jurisprudencia Laboral","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55104/rjl_00423","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Se discute sobre la jurisdicción competente (social o contenciosa) para impugnar los servicios mínimos fijados por la Autoridad Gubernativa. La sentencia comentada sienta dos grandes principios: 1º) Cuando se impugnen los servicios mínimos, impuestos por la autoridad gubernativa, la competencia para conocer el litigio corresponde al orden jurisdiccional contencioso-administrativo. 2º) Cuando se cuestiona un comportamiento empresarial, relacionado con la ejecución de los servicios mínimos, el conocimiento del litigio corresponde a la jurisdicción social. A su vez, esa dualidad jurisdiccional conduce a que el plazo de prescripción para reclamar en el orden social no puede activarse hasta la firmeza de la sentencia contenciosa.
The competent jurisdiction (social or contentious) to challenge the minimum services set by the Government Authority is discussed. The commented sentence establishes two main principles: 1º) When the minimum services imposed by the governmental authority are challenged, the competence to hear the dispute corresponds to the contentious-administrative jurisdictional order. 2º) When a business behavior is questioned, related to the execution of the minimum services, the knowledge of the litigation corresponds to the social jurisdiction. At the same time, this jurisdictional duality leads to the fact that the statute of limitations to claim in the social order cannot be activated until the finality of the contentious sentence.