Implicaciones jurisprudenciales de la corte suprema de justicia en el reconocimiento de la pensión de sobrevivientes en Colombia para el 2020
Cargando...
Fecha
2021
Autores
Barrios Julio, Jose David
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
En el presente proyecto de investigación viene a identificar cuáles han sido todos esos cambios que han impactado a la sociedad en la medida que la Corte Suprema de Justicia ha implementado una serie de aclaraciones mediante la Sentencia SL 1730 del 03 de Junio de 2020, conforme se dejó establecido que el requisito para ser beneficiario(a), en lo que se refiere a la convivencia mínima de 5 años con la causante antes del fallecimiento, señalado por el artículo 47 de la Ley 100 de 1993, modificado por el artículo 13 de la Ley 797 de 2003 no puede ser de obligatorio cumplimiento cuando el causante fallece en calidad de afiliado.
Se abordan diferentes conceptos en relación a la pensión de sobreviviente a partir de la jurisprudencia y la doctrina con el fin de poder aclarar al lector cual es el propósito de dicha prestación económica y por qué se ha convertido en un tema de mucha controversia en los distintos sectores de la sociedad (Fondos de pensiones, beneficiarios, abogados litigantes, funcionarios de la rama judicial, docentes de derecho, estudiantes, etc.).
Este proyecto es viable en la medida que permitirá determinar el acceso a un tema tan lleno de complejidades como lo es la pensión de sobrevivencia cuando el fallecido este en calidad de afiliado e intentara dejar de una manera clara la razón por la cual se deben diferenciar términos como “afiliado” y “pensionado” para la
aplicación de requisitos establecidos por el legislador en la vigente norma. No siendo menos importante, se abordará como va a permanecer dicho requisito de convivencia después de la interpretación dada por la Corte Suprema de Justicia.
En este contexto se presentan personas, con vínculos matrimoniales o de unión libre, que han tenido que afrontar el hecho fatal de la muerte de su compañero o compañera con el que un día decidieron construir un proyecto de vida en común y, posteriormente, se han enfrentado también a la frustración de que se les niegue la pensión de sobrevivientes, argumentada por la ausencia del requisito de convivencia con el causante durante no menos de cinco años antes del fallecimiento, según los parámetros de las normas vigentes.
Por lo tanto, esta investigación pretende analizar a fondo cada una de las situaciones que tuvo en cuenta la Corte Suprema de Justicia para realizar dicha aclaración, los antecedentes que ha tenido la pensión de sobrevivencia en cuanto al requisito de convivencia, analizar con que propósito el legislador establece este requisito y a su vez se determina que resultados puede ocasionar este cambio jurisprudencial.
La temática abordada sería de gran utilidad para las personas interesadas en el reconocimiento de una pensión de sobrevivencia, abogados litigantes y estudiantes de la facultad de derecho ya que permitirá desaparecer dicha confusión en lo que concierne a la validez que tiene el requisito de convivencia de la conyugue o compañera/o permanente del afiliado que ha fallecido. Adicionalmente, se dejará por sentado las intenciones que tiene el legislador por salvaguardar el patrimonio del estado procurando evitar conductas fraudulentas, como convivencias a última hora con quien está a punto de fallecer y así acceder a la pensión de sobrevivientes.
In this research project, it identifies what have been all those changes that have impacted society to the extent that the Supreme Court of Justice has implemented a series of clarifications through Sentence SL 1730 of June 03, 2020, as stated established that the requirement to be a beneficiary, in what refers to the minimum coexistence of 5 years with the deceased before death, indicated by article 47 of Law 100 of 1993, modified by article 13 of the Law 797 of 2003 cannot be mandatory when the deceased dies as an affiliate. Different concepts in relation to the survivor's pension are addressed based on jurisprudence and doctrine to clarify to the reader what is the purpose of said economic benefit and why it has become a subject of much controversy in the different sectors of society (pension funds, beneficiaries, trial lawyers, officials of the judicial branch, law teachers, students, etc.). This project is viable to the extent that it will allow determining access to a subject as full of complexities as the survivor's pension when the deceased is an affiliate and will try to make clear the reason why terms should be differentiated. as "affiliate" and "pensioner" for the application of requirements established by the legislator in the current regulation. Not being less important, it will be addressed how said requirement of coexistence will remain after the interpretation given by the Supreme Court of Justice. In this context, there are people, with marital ties or free union, who have had to face the fatal event of the death of their partner or partner with whom one day they decided to build a life project in common and, later, have been also faced with the frustration of being denied the survivor's pension, argued by the absence of the requirement of coexistence with the deceased for no less than five years before death, according to the parameters of the regulations in force. Therefore, this research aims to thoroughly analyze each of the situations that the Supreme Court of Justice considered to make said clarification, the background that the survivor's pension has had in terms of the requirement of coexistence, analyze for what purpose the legislator establishes this requirement and in turn determines what results this jurisprudential change may cause. The topic addressed would be very useful for people interested in the recognition of a survivor's pension, litigating lawyers and students at the law school since it will allow to disappear this confusion regarding the validity of the requirement of coexistence of the spouse or permanent partner of the member who has died. Additionally, the intentions of the legislator to safeguard the state's assets will be taken for granted, trying to avoid fraudulent behavior, such as last-minute coexistence with someone who is about to die and thus access the survivor's pension.
In this research project, it identifies what have been all those changes that have impacted society to the extent that the Supreme Court of Justice has implemented a series of clarifications through Sentence SL 1730 of June 03, 2020, as stated established that the requirement to be a beneficiary, in what refers to the minimum coexistence of 5 years with the deceased before death, indicated by article 47 of Law 100 of 1993, modified by article 13 of the Law 797 of 2003 cannot be mandatory when the deceased dies as an affiliate. Different concepts in relation to the survivor's pension are addressed based on jurisprudence and doctrine to clarify to the reader what is the purpose of said economic benefit and why it has become a subject of much controversy in the different sectors of society (pension funds, beneficiaries, trial lawyers, officials of the judicial branch, law teachers, students, etc.). This project is viable to the extent that it will allow determining access to a subject as full of complexities as the survivor's pension when the deceased is an affiliate and will try to make clear the reason why terms should be differentiated. as "affiliate" and "pensioner" for the application of requirements established by the legislator in the current regulation. Not being less important, it will be addressed how said requirement of coexistence will remain after the interpretation given by the Supreme Court of Justice. In this context, there are people, with marital ties or free union, who have had to face the fatal event of the death of their partner or partner with whom one day they decided to build a life project in common and, later, have been also faced with the frustration of being denied the survivor's pension, argued by the absence of the requirement of coexistence with the deceased for no less than five years before death, according to the parameters of the regulations in force. Therefore, this research aims to thoroughly analyze each of the situations that the Supreme Court of Justice considered to make said clarification, the background that the survivor's pension has had in terms of the requirement of coexistence, analyze for what purpose the legislator establishes this requirement and in turn determines what results this jurisprudential change may cause. The topic addressed would be very useful for people interested in the recognition of a survivor's pension, litigating lawyers and students at the law school since it will allow to disappear this confusion regarding the validity of the requirement of coexistence of the spouse or permanent partner of the member who has died. Additionally, the intentions of the legislator to safeguard the state's assets will be taken for granted, trying to avoid fraudulent behavior, such as last-minute coexistence with someone who is about to die and thus access the survivor's pension.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Implicaciones, Jurisprudencia, Pensión, Sobrevivencia, Reconocimiento, Explicación, Objeto, Identificación, Requisitos, Beneficiario, Sustitución Pensional, Indicación, Postura, Convivencia, Cónyuge, Compañera(o) permanente, Enumeración, Consecuencia, Sentencia, Implications, Jurisprudence, Pension, Survival, Recognition, Explanation, Purpose, Identification, Requirements, Beneficiary, Pension Substitution, Indication, Position, Coexistence, Spouse, Permanent partner, Enumeration, Consequence, Sentence
