Acción idónea para reclamaciones de honorarios al Estado colombiano con ocasión de contratos por prestación de servicios profesionales cuando el contrato no se ha perfeccionado. Sentencia n.º 73001-23-31-000-2000-03075-01(24897) de Consejo De Estado - Sala Contenciosa Administrativa – sección tercera, de 19 de noviembre de 2012
Cargando...
Fecha
2022
Autores
Solano Beltrán, Gustavo Enrique
Alegría Tete, Víctor Nel
Arrieta Bobadilla, Alberto Mario
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Ediciones Universidad Simón Bolívar
Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales
Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales
Resumen
La postura crítica en este ensayo no se focaliza en la modificación de las normas que ya se encuentran concertadas respecto a la contratación pública, sino hacer visible la inconsistente postura respecto a la esfera de la contratación estatal en nuestro país colombiano, la cual es adoptada por la jurisprudencia del Consejo de Estado, en especial en su sentencia de unificación y que es aplicada actualmente por ser el precedente judicial para los agentes del Estado de cara a la ratio in rem verso o acción de enriquecimiento sin justa causa, así como también su procedencia y vista como la regla general predominante sobre las relaciones contractuales de conformidad a las solemnidades legales, es decir, el vínculo contractual que tenga un particular con el Estado cuya esencia debe estar investida de solemnidad y que debe ser escrito. Y si, desde la óptica de la existencia del contrato estatal, el mismo es en esencia, escrito. Bajo ese escenario, en Colombia es imposible prestarle un servicio al Estado y sus agencias sin que previamente se haya perfeccionado un contrato, pero en otros espacios jurídicos que fueron concertados en la sentencia de unificación, ello si es dable y precisamente por este asunto, se sienta la postura crítica dentro del presente ensayo académico. En nuestro país colombiano, la reglamentación que enviste el perfeccionamiento del contrato y lo que se requiere para ejecutarlo, es un conjunto de normas de orden público, es decir, una normatividad de estricto cumplimiento y que no se encuentran libremente a disposición de las partes, pues los artículos 39 y 41 de la Ley 80 de 1993 establecen que el vínculo contractual celebrado entre entidades estatales debe ser por escrito y se concreta a través de un acuerdo sobre el objeto del contrato y la contraprestación del mismo.
The critical stance in this essay is not focused on the modification of the rules that are already agreed with respect to public procurement, but to make visible the inconsistent position regarding the sphere of state contracting in our Colombian country, which is adopted by the jurisprudence of the Council of State, especially in its unification sentence and which is currently applied as the judicial precedent for the agents of the State regarding the ratio in rem verso or action of unjust enrichment without just cause, as well as its origin and seen as the predominant general rule on contractual relations in accordance with the legal solemnities, that is, the contractual link that a private individual has with the State whose essence must be invested with solemnity and which must be written. And if, from the point of view of the existence of the state contract, it is in essence, written. Under this scenario, in Colombia it is impossible to provide a service to the State and its agencies without having previously perfected a contract, but in other legal spaces that were agreed upon in the unification sentence, this is possible and precisely because of this issue, the critical position is established in this academic essay. In our Colombian country, the regulation that governs the execution of the contract and what is required to execute it, is a set of rules of public order, that is to say, a strict compliance regulation that is not freely available to the parties, since articles 39 and 41 of Law 80 of 1993 establish that the contractual relationship entered into between state entities must be in writing and is materialized through an agreement on the object of the contract and the consideration thereof.
The critical stance in this essay is not focused on the modification of the rules that are already agreed with respect to public procurement, but to make visible the inconsistent position regarding the sphere of state contracting in our Colombian country, which is adopted by the jurisprudence of the Council of State, especially in its unification sentence and which is currently applied as the judicial precedent for the agents of the State regarding the ratio in rem verso or action of unjust enrichment without just cause, as well as its origin and seen as the predominant general rule on contractual relations in accordance with the legal solemnities, that is, the contractual link that a private individual has with the State whose essence must be invested with solemnity and which must be written. And if, from the point of view of the existence of the state contract, it is in essence, written. Under this scenario, in Colombia it is impossible to provide a service to the State and its agencies without having previously perfected a contract, but in other legal spaces that were agreed upon in the unification sentence, this is possible and precisely because of this issue, the critical position is established in this academic essay. In our Colombian country, the regulation that governs the execution of the contract and what is required to execute it, is a set of rules of public order, that is to say, a strict compliance regulation that is not freely available to the parties, since articles 39 and 41 of Law 80 of 1993 establish that the contractual relationship entered into between state entities must be in writing and is materialized through an agreement on the object of the contract and the consideration thereof.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Acción idónea, Reclamaciones de honorarios, Contratos por prestación de servicios profesionales, Contrato no perfeccionado, Estado, Adequate action, Fee claims, Professional services contracts, Unperfected contract, State