Contenido
En Argentina, la Inspección General de Justicia (IGJ) definió que la red de franquicias inmobiliarias RE/MAX y/o RE/MAX Argentina SRL es ilícita y ordenó el inicio de la acción judicial de disolución y liquidación de la empresa establecida en la Argentina. [1].
La empresa no se presentó en ningún momento ante la citación de la Inspección General de Justicia de la Nación (IGJ) para que efectuara su descargo ante la denuncia y presentación de pruebas del Colegio Ùnico de Corredores Inmobiliarios de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires (CUCICBA) en febrero de 2020.
En cambio, la empresa si salió a rechazar la denuncia mediaticamente por distintos medios de comunicación (radiales, TV y diarios) por considerarla "infundada" y remarcó que continuaría trabajando normalmente a pesar de la gravísima situación.
RE/MAX Argentina SRL inició una apelación judicial de la resolución de la IGJ que ordenó su inmediata liquidación y disolución, iniciándose la causa el 8 de octubre de 2020.
Como última novedad en el expediente que se viene tramitando en la justicia desde aquella fecha, la Inspección General de Justicia solicitó con fecha 2 de julio de 2021 que se tenga por contestado en tiempo y forma el traslado conferido de la apelación y solicita al Tribunal que desestime la apelación articulada y confirme en todas sus partes la resolución IGJ Nº 350/2020, objeto de la misma; con costas.[2].
En consecuencia, la IGJ entendió que la entidad estadounidense "ejerce indirectamente el corretaje inmobiliario eludiendo la legislación local, que establece imperativamente requisitos para esa actividad y se beneficia a través de Remax Argentina SRL, participando de las comisiones de las operaciones inmobiliarias intermediadas por los numerosos subfranquiciados, más allá de que esas participaciones pudieran aparecer ficticiamente calificadas como regalías o concepto similar, contributivo del uso de la marca Remax".[3].
Judgment
May 24, 2022.
National Chamber of Commercial Appeals. Autonomous City of Buenos Aires
Magistrates: Miguel F. Bargalló (For its foundations) - Ángel O. Sala - Hernán Monclá
SAIJ ID: FA22130008.
It is appropriate to annul Resolution No. 350 of the General Inspection of Justice that ordered the immediate promotion of the judicial action of dissolution and liquidation, provided for by art. 19 of Law 19,550, against an S.R.L. of real estate businesses, given that the IGJ lacks powers to supervise the activity of a limited liability company such as that which the law does expressly assign to it with respect to joint-stock companies.
The IGJ filed a complaint and initiated a trial and criminal complaint against the judges who annulled Resolution No. 350, stating that Chamber E has violated the division of powers by invading spheres of competence of the National State exercised through this IGJ by vetoing administrative acts – as is any order that the Inspector General of Justice of the Nation directs to its departments, such as in this case, the one directed to the Department of Judicial Affairs for the purposes of the latter initiating actions. judicial - that have not yet caused a state, insufficient to be invoked and found a grievance, since such an issue is not susceptible to jurisdictional debate, access to justice being a constitutional guarantee.
The IGJ files a complaint for a denied federal extraordinary appeal.
Excellency Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation:
Finally, the IGJ requests VI.
REQUEST:
For all of the above, to the Ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, I request:
Please note that this IGJ has submitted, on behalf of and filed in legal and due form the Complaint for Federal Extraordinary Appeal denied and the physical and electronic addresses have been established. Please attach the documentary that illustrates this complaint and the respective Budget Forecast.
Attentive to the grounds presented, the Complaint is declared admissible, ordering a new ruling, in which the appealed decision is revoked with costs, or, conf. art. 16 of Law 48, resolve on the merits of the issue, revoking the resolution of Chamber E of the Excma. Commercial Chamber, confirming the administrative acts left without effect by the Court A-quo, with costs.[4].
To date (7-28-2024), the underlying issue regarding the illegality of the franchise and its order of dissolution and liquidation has not been resolved and is yet to be resolved in the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, having already passed through Judicial Secretariat No. 1 and VOLACIAS No. 3 and No. 4.