Article 326 of the code of Civil Procedure says on the subject: conciliation hearing. Articulo326. -Present Parties, or their legal representatives or representatives with a capacity to do so, the judge will hear the reasons that expose by his order. He immediately proposes the formula of reconciliation that its discretion advise you. Can also have the suspension of the hearing and its later resumption within one period not more than ten days. If the compromise was accepted, it noted in the book of reconciliations that each court take effect, leaving evidence in the dossier.
If the proposal is not accepted, shall extend Act describing the proposed formula, mentioning also the part that not lent their conformity to it. If the judgment grants equal or lesser law which proposed in conciliation and was rejected, is imposed on that one fine not less than two nor more than ten Procesal reference units, rejected it unless it is food processing, in which case the judge may reduce the fine attention to the amount defendant and which is ordered in pay in judgment. This is not a minor fine, as it may lead to be among six hundred eighty nuevos soles (S /.) (680 00) and three thousand and four hundred new soles (S /.) 3,400. 00) by the simple fact of not having accepted the proposal of the judge who can take it to the judgment; the risk of not falling into such disbursement disappears, if simply does not come to the audience; that is the standard promotes absenteeism to judicial conciliation. Thereon the problem is created by own drafting standard, therefore punish the non-acceptance of the proposal in addition to collide against the principle of the autonomy of the will that governs the making of agreements, encourages absenteeism. The logical thing would have been that if they wanted to punish malicious litigator, will punish in any case the absence from the hearing, as it is done in the work-life balance, where the measure has rather efficient effects.