APPEAL: 5014/1999 - RESOLUTION: 128 573 - SECRETARY: SPECIAL
Santiago, nine August two thousand two. Viewed: Plays the sentence on appeal, but removing the sentence that reads Under Article 55 of the Consumer Act the complaint is considered frivolous, to be unusual that in a public parking is offered a guarantee of the nature of that requested by the complainant .. And you have in place this: 1 .- That according to the merit of the process flow has not been established that the alleged establishment offers, apart from the Annex, but open-parking, security or proof of his position, which does not imply that complaint has been reckless, it is not uncommon for common grocery items or construction, maintain surveillance systems for vehicles parked on site and immediate attachments to their premises, which gives customers peace of mind and makes complete and modern services. 2 .- That the above discussion it follows, therefore, that the complaint is of plausibility, so it can not be condemned in costs. For these reasons, the sentence referred revocala is July 30 of 1999 and is written to fs. 18, as costs against the plaintiff and states, however, that absolves them. It confirms, moreover, that ruling. Confirmatory agreed to vote against the Attorney Integrative Mr. Hernandez, who e stûv to repeal that part also in the ruling on appeal and accept the claim at issue, punishing the accused, as in his opinion applying the rules of logic and experience- the establishment denounced as those of his kind, to provide parking to their customers, induces or suggests the idea that this place is safe by having appropriate supervision. Sign up and be refunded. Writing by Minister Cisternas. No Mr. Valenzuela signed by the Minister despite having attended the hearing of the case and agreement, for being absent. No. 5014-1999 issued by the Ministers .- Mr. Sergio Valenzuela Patiño and Lamberto Cisternas Rocha and Mr. Domingo Hernández Integrative Advocate Emparanza.
0 comments:
Post a Comment