Principio de seguridad jurídica versus la aplicatoriedad del Código Orgánico General de Proceso en procesos culminados con Código de Procedimiento Civil.

Abstract

The validity of the COGEP, arbitrate transitory provisions, being the first one that is included in said normative body of relevance. In the same way, the final provisions will be analyzed in a concordant way, particularly the second, which deals with the rules that must be given in the auction, which roughly would be a diligence immersed within the execution phase. For the aforementioned, a comprehensive and systematic analysis of the current legal system is required, in such a way that it can be specified and determined what is the regulation that must be applied in the concluded trials, which have a sentence involved, and which were substantiated with the repealed Code of Civil Procedure. This has the relevant legal connotation since, at the time of executing according to the previously individualized provisions of the General Organic Code of Processes, it happens that the justice operators have a duality of criteria at the time of substantiating the execution phases. That is, some choose to open the execution phase with the rules of the COGEP and others with the rules of the CPC, revealing the existence of a misguided error, precisely due to lack of clarity in the language and aggravated by non-binding consultations that the National Court of Justice itself has provided for these cases. This can only indicate a stage where legal security and due process are perceived as openly violated.