Entre la excepción y la reconvención: algunas líneas grises en la jurisprudencia

Abstract

The statement of defense and the counterclaim are, basically, the two main options the respondent can follow once the claimant has lodged a claim. Both procedural vehicles are regulated differently in the Civil Procedure Act, and case law has clarified in which scenarios must be used the regime of the statement of defense, and which others require a counterclaim. However, in practice there is a blurred frontier between both regimens. In many cases, this requires a deep consideration of whether the statement of defenses' requests should have been conducted through a counterclaim or, where appropriate, through a possible contingent-counterclaim, joined to the statement of defense. The purpose of this article is to analyse how Courts have treated the statement of defense and the counterclaim, particularly in cases of doubt regarding which procedural vehicle should have been the most appropriate for the respondent's position.