The date at the end of the document is April 29th, 2009.

http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/spa...

Judge Rapporteur: EMIR GARCÍA ROSAS
Exp No. 2002-0375
X-2002-000019

By letter filed with the Board dated September 17, 2002, counsel Marianna Hari Almeida, Henry and Maria Fernanda Torrealba Zajía Ledesma (INPREABOGADO Nros. 52336, 11568 and 32501), acting with the legal parent of the corporate MINERA Las Cristinas, CA (MINC ) (registered in the Mercantile Registry of the Judicial District of Bolivar State with headquarters in Puerto Ordaz, dated January 24, 1992, as No. 17, Volume A, No. 132), filed an administrative appeal against the invalidity innominada measure administrative act contained in No. 01-PRE-678 dated November 6, 2001, issued by the President of the Venezuelan Guayana Corporation (CVG) (Autonomous Institute established by the Statute of Guyana Development Agency, issued by Executive Decree No. 430, dated December 29 , 1960, amended by Decree-Law No. 3574, dated June 21, 1985), which declared the contract terminated for exploration, development and exploitation of minerals and alluvial gold in the Veta area called Las Cristinas 4, 5, 6 and 7, between the Corporation and referring to the appellant.
On June 19, 2002 the court accepted the appeal of Conduct, agreeing to the notification of citizens of the Republic Attorney General and Solicitor General of the Republic. Also ordered to rid the poster referred to in Article 125 of the then existing law of the Supreme Court, in the third (3rd) day following release of that file constaren notifications ordered. It also agreed to act as citizen President of the Corporation Venezolana de Guayana, for his knowledge. Finally, with regard to the precautionary measure requested innominada left established that, at the time, ordered to open the respective file separately.
By letters dated in September 17 and October 1, 2002 the appellant's extended the interim measure requested.
By order of February 25, 2003 the Court agreed to open the notebook Substantiation of measures, which was referred to the Board on March 11, 2003.
On 1 April 2003 reported in Hall and a rapporteur was appointed Judge Yolanda Jaimes Guerrero.
On April 8, 2003 Hari lawyers and Marianna Almeida Maria Fernanda Zajía, acting with the legal parent of Minera Las Cristinas, CA extended the application of precautionary measures.
By letter of April 23, 2003 counsel Simon Araque (INPREABOGADO No. 5303), acting with the legal guardian of the Venezuelan Guayana Corporation opposed the relief requested.
Written May 20, 2003 opposed to the precautionary measures requested counsel Eduardo Rodríguez Selas (INPREABOGADO No. 73558), acting as legal guardian of the company Crystallex International Corporation (company organized under the laws of Canada dated 22 March 1984 under No. 345631-5 , whose branch was registered in the Commercial Register of the Second Judicial District of the Capital District and Miranda State as No. 70, vol 185-A).
On October 2, 2003, the court Empowered Minera Las Cristinas, CA made comments to the notice of opposition filed by corporations Corporación Venezolana de Guayana and Crystallex International Corporation dated April 23 and May 20 of that year.
On November 18, 2003 the court Seized of the Corporación Venezolana de Guayana requested sentencing.
Diligence by June 15 of 2004 empowered the court requested the bringing up of the Board Accidental.
On July 29 of 2004 empowered the court of Minera Las Cristinas, CA stated: "For legal purposes relevant to inform the judge who will decide this case, MINC abandoned the procedure in this book's main trial ..." . It is the Board dated June 4, 2008 by Decision No. 00684, denied approval of such waiver of the proceedings in an administrative appeal of invalidity brought by Minera Las Cristinas, CA
By order dated November 29, 2006, under the inhibition of Judge Hadel Mostafa Paolini dated May 25, 2006 statements, was the Political-Administrative Accidental as follows: President: Judge Evelyn Marrero Ortíz, Vice-President: Judge Yolanda Jaimes Guerrero; Judges Levis Ignacio Zerpa, Emiro Garcia Rosas, Associate: Maria Luisa López Acuña. Rapporteur was appointed to the Associate María Luisa López Acuña.
On March 5, 2009 the paper was to reassign Judge Emiro Garcia Rosas.
I
Considerations for deciding
After reviewing the records of proceedings, the Board noted that the case is Paralyzed from the July 29, 2004, why now check whether the perención operated.
It should be clear that the perención of the body is a mechanism of abnormal termination of the process, meaning that the ruling handed down by the operator of justice to declare the perención, res judicata does not produce material, so that the complainant could bring back demand in similar terms in which it was previously proposed, provided it is within the legal time frame established for this purpose.
It is then institute proceedings in reference to law as a mechanism designed to avoid the processes that perpetuate and organs of administration of justice must ensure the composition of cases in which there is no interest of the parties to the proceedings.
In this regard, Article 19, par Fifteenth of the Organic Law of the Supreme Court of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela provides:
"The body is terminated as of right in cases that have been Paralyzed for more than one (1) year prior to the submission of reports. This term shall begin on the date on which the last procedural act. After that time, the Supreme Court consummate perención shall declare the motion or request, which must be notified to the parties, by a sign posted in a newspaper of national circulation. After a period of fifteen (15) days shall be declared perención of the body. "
However, it should be noted regarding the interpretation of the standard partial transcript, which by decision No. 1466 dated August 5, 2004, the Board Constituc this ional High Court ruled that:
"(...) The Board agrees desaplicar unintelligible by the provision contained in paragraph fifteen of Article 19 of the Organic Law of the newest Supreme Court Justice, who seems to lapse calamis of a legislator (...) agreed to implement the Code Civil Procedure supplementarily (...) according to the first paragraph of Article 19 of the Organic Law of the Supreme Court, for instance regarding the perención.
This prevents legal precept, in its header, the following:
'Every body is exhausted by the course of a year without any act of procedure executed by the parties. The inactivity of the Judge after hearing the case, will not produce the perención ..
Consequently, as the previous provision governing the appropriate and desirable institution before the institution of proceedings perención covered by the Code of Civil Procedure, where appropriate it will be applied to cases pending before the High Court of when such a course. So decided. "
The previous decision was upheld by decision No. 2148, dated September 14, 2004 in the same room, which determined in a similar way:
"The rule is that transcribes pursuing motion, the court procedural penalties the inactivity of the parties, that punishment takes place in its own right it is eleven o'clock made the assumption that the supports, ie the passage of time. However, the confusing terms of the legal rule which led to this decision by not transcribed Courtroom 1466 of 5 August 2004 at desaplicarla by unintelligible and, therefore, as it allows enforcement supplétive Article 19 paragraph 2 of the Organic Law of the Supreme Court, applying the Code of Civil Procedure to cases instance in which the perención of trials that are still before the Supreme Court.
Specifically, Article 267 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the rule should apply in these cases, which states:
'Every body is exhausted by the course of a year without any act of procedure executed by the parties. The inactivity of the Judge after hearing the case, perención not occur. "(Highlighting this room).
Having regard to the criteria cited case law, which established that on perención of the body to apply the normative assumption under the heading of section 267 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Board is going to determine whether perención verified.
In this regard, it is necessary to clarify that since July 29, 2004, the date on which the court empowered Minera Las Cristinas, CA considerations made, to date, the cause has been Paralyzed for more than one (1) year without that has been carried out any act of procedure by the parties, it is evident lack of interest.
Based on the foregoing, the Board must declare that it has operated as the incidence of right perención injunction in this instance, as in September out in Article 267 of the Code of Civil Procedure. So states.
II
DECISION
For the above reasons, the Acting Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court, to administer justice on behalf of the Republic and by authority of the Act states that it has been consummated as of right and thus PERENCIÓN This Instance Extinguish the precautionary effect.
Publish, register and communicate. Cuaderno filed separately and add the certified copy of this decision to the principal piece.
Given, signed and sealed in the Hall Office of the Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court in Caracas, to the twenty-eight (28) days of April, two thousand nine (2009). 199 th year of Independence and 150th of the Federation.

The President
EVELYN MARRERO ORTÍZ
Vice President
YOLANDA GUERRERO JAIMES

Judges,
LEVIS ZERPA IGNACIO

EMIR GARCÍA ROSAS
Reporter
MARÍA LUISA LÓPEZ ACUÑA
Associate
The Secretary,
Yamila SOFIA GUZMAN


In twenty-nine (29) April, two thousand nine, was released and recorded the previous sentence as No. 00540, which is not signed by the Associate María Luisa López, for not being present at the discussion for good reason.
The Secretary,
Yamila SOFIA GUZMAN