{
  "id": "nexus-ext-1-0034-377790",
  "citation": "Res. 00327-2025 Tribunal de Apelación Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda",
  "section": "nexus_decisions",
  "doc_type": "court_decision",
  "title_es": "Naturaleza jurídica de la SUGEF en defensa judicial",
  "title_en": "Legal nature of SUGEF in judicial defense",
  "summary_es": "Esta resolución del Tribunal de Apelación Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda aborda un recurso de apelación en un proceso bancario. Analiza la naturaleza jurídica de la Superintendencia General de Entidades Financieras (SUGEF), definiéndola como un órgano de desconcentración máxima del Banco Central de Costa Rica (BCCR), sin personalidad jurídica propia. Determina que, al impugnar actuaciones de la SUGEF o demandar responsabilidad por su funcionamiento, el demandado debe ser el BCCR, representado por el Superintendente General. Con base en ello, revoca la resolución apelada sobre costas, ordenando que la totalidad del monto se fije a favor del BCCR, sin necesidad de liquidación adicional por parte de la SUGEF, al no existir pluralidad subjetiva. La decisión aclara la correcta representación procesal en este tipo de litigios.",
  "summary_en": "This ruling by the Administrative and Treasury Civil Court of Appeals addresses an appeal in a banking case. It analyzes the legal nature of the General Superintendency of Financial Entities (SUGEF), defining it as a maximum deconcentrated body of the Central Bank of Costa Rica (BCCR), without its own legal personality. It determines that when challenging SUGEF actions or claiming liability for its operations, the proper defendant is the BCCR, represented by the Superintendent General. Based on this, it overturns the appealed costs decision, ordering the entire amount to be awarded in favor of the BCCR, without need for additional cost liquidation by SUGEF, as there was no multiplicity of parties. The decision clarifies proper procedural representation in such litigation.",
  "court_or_agency": "Tribunal de Apelación Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda",
  "date": "21/08/2025",
  "year": "2025",
  "topic_ids": [
    "_off-topic"
  ],
  "primary_topic_id": "_off-topic",
  "es_concept_hints": [
    "desconcentración máxima",
    "personalidad jurídica propia",
    "legitimación activa y pasiva",
    "apoderado generalísimo",
    "pluralidad subjetiva",
    "liquidación de costas"
  ],
  "article_citations": [
    {
      "law": "Ley General de la Administración Pública",
      "article": "83",
      "doc_id": "norm-13231",
      "source": "metadata"
    },
    {
      "law": "Ley 6227",
      "article": "83",
      "doc_id": "norm-13231",
      "source": "metadata"
    },
    {
      "law": "Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica",
      "article": "115",
      "doc_id": "norm-40928",
      "source": "metadata"
    },
    {
      "law": "Ley 7558",
      "article": "115",
      "doc_id": "norm-40928",
      "source": "metadata"
    },
    {
      "law": "Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica",
      "article": "131",
      "doc_id": "norm-40928",
      "source": "metadata"
    },
    {
      "law": "Ley 7558",
      "article": "131",
      "doc_id": "norm-40928",
      "source": "metadata"
    },
    {
      "law": "Código Procesal Contencioso-Administrativo",
      "article": "17",
      "doc_id": "norm-57436",
      "source": "metadata"
    },
    {
      "law": "Ley 8508",
      "article": "17",
      "doc_id": "norm-57436",
      "source": "metadata"
    }
  ],
  "keywords_es": [
    "SUGEF",
    "desconcentración máxima",
    "personalidad jurídica",
    "representación procesal",
    "costas",
    "BCCR",
    "Ley Orgánica del Banco Central",
    "LGAP"
  ],
  "keywords_en": [
    "SUGEF",
    "maximum deconcentration",
    "legal personality",
    "procedural representation",
    "costs",
    "BCCR",
    "Organic Law of the Central Bank",
    "General Public Administration Law"
  ],
  "excerpt_es": "No obstante la desconcentración máxima no implica que el órgano tenga personalidad jurídica propia, sigue dependiendo del ente al que se encuentra adscrito, quien tiene la capacidad legal para su representación (capacidad procesal), así como para ejercer las acciones judiciales en defensa de sus intereses (legitimación activa), como para defenderse de las demandas interpuestas en su contra (legitimación pasiva).\n\nSe entiende que cuando se impugna una actuación formal de un órgano desconcentrado o se demanda responsabilidad producto de su quehacer, debe demandarse al ente u órgano al que está adscrito.\n\nDe acuerdo con lo anterior, se revoca la resolución impugnada, para que la totalidad del monto que en definitiva se fije, lo sea a favor del BCCR, sin que sea necesaria una liquidación adicional de costas.",
  "excerpt_en": "However, maximum deconcentration does not imply that the body has its own legal personality; it remains dependent on the entity to which it is attached, which has the legal capacity to represent it (procedural capacity), as well as to exercise legal actions in defense of its interests (active standing) and to defend against lawsuits filed against it (passive standing).\n\nIt is understood that when a formal act of a deconcentrated body is challenged or liability is claimed as a result of its work, the entity or body to which it is attached must be sued.\n\nIn accordance with the foregoing, the appealed decision is overturned, so that the entire amount ultimately set shall be in favor of the BCCR, without need for an additional cost liquidation.",
  "outcome": {
    "label_en": "Overturned",
    "label_es": "Revoca",
    "summary_en": "The Court overturned the costs decision and ordered the entire amount to be set in favor of the BCCR, without need for additional liquidation by SUGEF.",
    "summary_es": "El Tribunal revocó la resolución sobre costas y ordenó que la totalidad del monto se fije a favor del BCCR, sin necesidad de liquidación adicional por la SUGEF."
  },
  "pull_quotes": [
    {
      "context": "Considerando V",
      "quote_en": "maximum deconcentration does not imply that the body has its own legal personality; it remains dependent on the entity to which it is attached",
      "quote_es": "la desconcentración máxima no implica que el órgano tenga personalidad jurídica propia, sigue dependiendo del ente al que se encuentra adscrito"
    },
    {
      "context": "Considerando V",
      "quote_en": "when a formal act of a deconcentrated body is challenged or liability is claimed as a result of its work, the entity or body to which it is attached must be sued",
      "quote_es": "cuando se impugna una actuación formal de un órgano desconcentrado o se demanda responsabilidad producto de su quehacer, debe demandarse al ente u órgano al que está adscrito"
    },
    {
      "context": "Considerando V",
      "quote_en": "In the case of SUGEF, the legislator decided that representation of the Bank would fall to the Superintendent General of Financial Entities",
      "quote_es": "En el caso de la SUGEF, el legislador decidió que la representación del Banco, recaería en el Superintendente General de Entidades Financieras"
    }
  ],
  "cites": [
    {
      "id": "norm-13231",
      "citation": "Ley 6227",
      "title_en": "General Law of Public Administration",
      "title_es": "Ley General de la Administración Pública",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "02/05/1978",
      "year": "1978"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-40928",
      "citation": "Ley 7558",
      "title_en": "Organic Law of the Central Bank of Costa Rica",
      "title_es": "Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "03/11/1995",
      "year": "1995"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-57436",
      "citation": "Ley 8508",
      "title_en": "Contentious-Administrative Code",
      "title_es": "Código Procesal Contencioso-Administrativo",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "28/04/2006",
      "year": "2006"
    }
  ],
  "cited_by": [
    {
      "id": "norm-13231",
      "citation": "Ley 6227",
      "title_en": "General Law of Public Administration",
      "title_es": "Ley General de la Administración Pública",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "02/05/1978",
      "year": "1978"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-40928",
      "citation": "Ley 7558",
      "title_en": "Organic Law of the Central Bank of Costa Rica",
      "title_es": "Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "03/11/1995",
      "year": "1995"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-57436",
      "citation": "Ley 8508",
      "title_en": "Contentious-Administrative Code",
      "title_es": "Código Procesal Contencioso-Administrativo",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "28/04/2006",
      "year": "2006"
    }
  ],
  "references": {
    "internal": [
      {
        "target_id": "norm-13231",
        "kind": "cited_norm",
        "label": "Ley General de la Administración Pública"
      },
      {
        "target_id": "norm-40928",
        "kind": "cited_norm",
        "label": "Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica"
      },
      {
        "target_id": "norm-57436",
        "kind": "cited_norm",
        "label": "Código Procesal Contencioso-Administrativo"
      }
    ],
    "external": []
  },
  "source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/ext-1-0034-377790",
  "tier": 2,
  "is_environmental": false,
  "_editorial_citation_count": 0,
  "regulations_by_article": null,
  "amendments_by_article": null,
  "dictamen_by_article": null,
  "concordancias_by_article": null,
  "afectaciones_by_article": null,
  "resoluciones_by_article": null,
  "cited_by_votos": [],
  "cited_norms": [
    {
      "art_num": "83",
      "art_scij": "77151",
      "art_subnum": "0",
      "doc_id": "norm-13231",
      "norm_fecha": "05 Nov 2024",
      "norm_name": "Ley General de la Administración Pública",
      "norm_num": "6227",
      "norm_ver": "143668",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley"
    },
    {
      "art_num": "115",
      "art_scij": "178925",
      "art_subnum": "0",
      "doc_id": "norm-40928",
      "norm_fecha": "04 Nov 2024",
      "norm_name": "Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica",
      "norm_num": "7558",
      "norm_ver": "144307",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley"
    },
    {
      "art_num": "131",
      "art_scij": "178941",
      "art_subnum": "0",
      "doc_id": "norm-40928",
      "norm_detalle": "Inciso 1",
      "norm_fecha": "04 Nov 2024",
      "norm_name": "Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica",
      "norm_num": "7558",
      "norm_ver": "144307",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley"
    },
    {
      "art_num": "17",
      "art_scij": "18",
      "art_subnum": "0",
      "doc_id": "norm-57436",
      "norm_fecha": "06 May 2025",
      "norm_name": "Código Procesal Contencioso-Administrativo",
      "norm_num": "8508",
      "norm_ver": "146091",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley"
    }
  ],
  "cited_norms_inverted": [
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-13231",
      "norm_num": "6227",
      "norm_name": "Ley General de la Administración Pública",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "02/05/1978"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-40928",
      "norm_num": "7558",
      "norm_name": "Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "03/11/1995"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-57436",
      "norm_num": "8508",
      "norm_name": "Código Procesal Contencioso-Administrativo",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "28/04/2006"
    }
  ],
  "sentencias_relacionadas": [],
  "temas_y_subtemas": [
    {
      "Subtemas": [
        {
          "id": 1,
          "nombre": "Naturaleza jurídica"
        }
      ],
      "id": 1,
      "nombre": "Superintendencia General de Entidades Financieras"
    }
  ],
  "cascade_only": false,
  "amendment_count": 0,
  "body_es_text": "\"V. DE LA NATURALEZA JURÍDICA DE LA SUPERINTENDENCIA GENERAL DE ENTIDADES FINANCIERAS: Para dilucidar el agravio por razones procesales, en cuanto a la representación del Banco accionado por la SUGEF, es necesario acudir a las normas que la crearon, dentro de la especial complejidad prevista por el ordenamiento jurídico administrativo, conforme lo dispone el numeral 17 del CPCA. El artículo 115 de la Ley 7558, Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica (LOBCCR), creó la Superintendencia como un órgano de desconcentración máxima del Banco:\n\n\"Es de interés público la fiscalización de las entidades financieras del país, para lo cual se crea la Superintendencia General de Entidades Financieras, también denominada en esta ley la Superintendencia, como órgano de desconcentración máxima del Banco Central de Costa Rica. La Superintendencia regirá sus actividades por lo dispuesto en esta ley, sus reglamentos y las demás leyes aplicables\".\n\nEl legislador decidió, en razón de las competencias que desempeña el órgano, en la supervisión de las entidades financieras que realizan intermediación financiera en el país, utilizar este instituto, previsto en el artículo 83 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, \n\n\"Artículo 83.-\n\n1. Todo órgano distinto del jerarca estará plenamente subordinado a éste y al superior jerárquico inmediato, salvo desconcentración operada por ley o por reglamento.\n\n2. La desconcentración mínima se dará cuando el superior no pueda:\n\na) Avocar competencia del inferior; y\n\nb) Revisar o sustituir la conducta del inferior, de oficio o a instancia de parte.\n\n3. La desconcentración será máxima cuando el inferior esté sustraído además, a órdenes, instrucciones o circulares del superior.\n\n4. La imposibilidad de revisar o sustituir la conducta del inferior hará presumir la potestad de avocar la misma y a la inversa.\n\n5. Las normas que crean la desconcentración mínima serán de aplicación restrictiva en contra de la competencia del órgano desconcentrado y las que crean la desconcentración máxima serán de aplicación extendida en su favor\".\n\nNo obstante la desconcentración máxima no implica que el órgano tenga personalidad jurídica propia, sigue dependiendo del ente al que se encuentra adscrito, quien tiene la capacidad legal para su representación (capacidad procesal), así como para ejercer las acciones judiciales en defensa de sus intereses (legitimación activa), como para defenderse de las demandas interpuestas en su contra (legitimación pasiva). Existen dentro de la Administración Pública, tanto centralizada como descentralizada, órganos desconcentrados, sin personalidad jurídica propia, representados para efectos judiciales, por la Procuraduría General de la República, como por ejemplo, la Secretaría Técnica Ambiental (SETENA), órgano de desconcentración máxima del Ministerio del Ambiente o, como en este caso, la SUGEF, la cual estaría representada por el BCCR. Se entiende que cuando se impugna una actuación formal de un órgano desconcentrado o se demanda responsabilidad producto de su quehacer, debe demandarse al ente u órgano al que está adscrito. En el caso de la SUGEF, el legislador, también en razón de la especialidad de sus competencias, decidió que la representación del Banco, recaería en el Superintendente General de Entidades Financieras, según lo prevé el artículo 131.1) de la Ley Orgánica citada:\n\n\"Artículo 131- Funciones del superintendente general de entidades financieras\n\nCorresponderán al superintendente general de entidades financieras, las siguientes funciones:\n\na) Ejercer, en nombre y por cuenta del Banco Central de Costa Rica, la representación legal, judicial y extrajudicial de dicho banco para las funciones propias de su cargo, con atribuciones de apoderado generalísimo sin límite de suma\". (El resaltado no es del original).\n\nEs la práctica de los litigantes demandar tanto a la SUGEF como al Banco, presume el Tribunal, asumiendo que la primera ostenta personalidad jurídica propia. Sin embargo, en una adecuada técnica jurídica, correspondería demandar únicamente al Banco, por las conductas formales y funcionamiento de la SUGEF. El Superintendente, conforme la norma de la LOBCCR, en nombre del Banco, ejercería la defensa de los intereses del órgano, en aplicación del artículo 17 del Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo (CPCA). De esta confusión en asumir la personalidad jurídica de la SUGEF, también participan los jueces de la jurisdicción, como en este caso, cuando interpretó por parte del juez ejecutor que era necesario hacer una liquidación por parte de la SUGEF, quien está impedido de gestionarla por no tener capacidad legal para ello y, otra por parte del Banco, en una errónea aplicación del numeral 12.2 del CPCA. En todo el proceso, la entonces Superintendente actuó como representante del Banco, los abogados de éste vinieron a aclarar lo dispuesto por la ley, en cuanto a que la Institución estaba debidamente representada. Por ello, en la fijación de las costas, no era aplicable el artículo 73.3 del CPC, porque no existió pluralidad subjetiva. La liquidación firmada por la señora Superintendente fue en nombre del Banco, quien se reitera, fue el demandado por conductas formales de la SUGEF. De acuerdo con lo anterior, se revoca la resolución impugnada, para que la totalidad del monto que en definitiva se fije, lo sea a favor del BCCR, sin que sea necesaria una liquidación adicional de costas.\"",
  "body_en_text": "V. ON THE LEGAL NATURE OF THE SUPERINTENDENCIA GENERAL DE ENTIDADES FINANCIERAS: To elucidate the grievance on procedural grounds, regarding the representation of the defendant Bank by SUGEF, it is necessary to refer to the norms that created it, within the special complexity envisaged by the administrative legal system, as provided by numeral 17 of the CPCA. Article 115 of Ley 7558, Ley Orgánica del Banco Central de Costa Rica (LOBCCR), created the Superintendencia as a maximum deconcentration (desconcentración máxima) body of the Bank:\n\n\"It is of public interest to supervise the country's financial entities, for which purpose the Superintendencia General de Entidades Financieras is created, also called in this law the Superintendencia, as a maximum deconcentration (desconcentración máxima) body of the Banco Central de Costa Rica. The Superintendencia shall govern its activities by the provisions of this law, its regulations, and other applicable laws.\"\n\nThe legislator decided, by reason of the powers exercised by the body, in the supervision of financial entities that carry out financial intermediation in the country, to use this institute, provided for in Article 83 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública,\n\n\"Article 83.-\n\n1. Every body other than the head shall be fully subordinate to the latter and to the immediate hierarchical superior, except for deconcentration (desconcentración) operated by law or by regulation.\n\n2. Minimum deconcentration (desconcentración mínima) shall occur when the superior cannot:\n\na) Avocar the competence of the inferior; and\n\nb) Review or substitute the conduct of the inferior, ex officio or at the request of a party.\n\n3. The deconcentration will be maximum (desconcentración máxima) when the inferior is also removed from orders, instructions, or circulars of the superior.\n\n4. The impossibility of reviewing or substituting the conduct of the inferior shall presume the power to avocar the same, and vice versa.\n\n5. The norms that create minimum deconcentration (desconcentración mínima) shall be of restrictive application against the competence of the deconcentrated body (órgano desconcentrado), and those that create maximum deconcentration (desconcentración máxima) shall be of extended application in its favor.\"\n\nNotwithstanding, maximum deconcentration (desconcentración máxima) does not imply that the body has its own legal personality; it continues to depend on the entity to which it is attached, which has the legal capacity for its representation (legal standing/capacidad procesal), as well as to bring judicial actions in defense of its interests (active legal standing/legitimación activa), and to defend itself against claims filed against it (passive legal standing/legitimación pasiva). There exist within the Public Administration, both centralized and decentralized, deconcentrated bodies (órganos desconcentrados), without their own legal personality, represented for judicial purposes by the Procuraduría General de la República, such as, for example, the Secretaría Técnica Ambiental (SETENA), a maximum deconcentration (desconcentración máxima) body of the Ministerio del Ambiente or, as in this case, SUGEF, which would be represented by the BCCR. It is understood that when a formal action of a deconcentrated body (órgano desconcentrado) is challenged or liability is claimed resulting from its operations, the entity or body to which it is attached must be sued. In the case of SUGEF, the legislator, also by reason of the specialty of its powers, decided that the representation of the Bank would fall to the Superintendente General de Entidades Financieras, as provided for in Article 131.1) of the cited Organic Law:\n\n\"Article 131- Functions of the superintendente general de entidades financieras\n\nThe following functions shall correspond to the superintendente general de entidades financieras:\n\na) Exercise, in the name and on behalf of the Banco Central de Costa Rica, the legal, judicial, and extrajudicial representation of said bank for the functions proper to its office, with the powers of a generalísimo attorney without limit of sum.\" (The highlighting is not from the original).\n\nIt is the practice of litigants to sue both SUGEF and the Bank, the Tribunal presumes, assuming that the former has its own legal personality. However, in a proper legal technique, it would be appropriate to sue only the Bank, for the formal conduct and operation of SUGEF. The Superintendente, in accordance with the rule of the LOBCCR, in the name of the Bank, would exercise the defense of the body's interests, in application of Article 17 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo (CPCA). From this confusion in assuming SUGEF's legal personality, the judges of the jurisdiction also participate, as in this case, when the executing judge interpreted that a liquidation by SUGEF was necessary, which is prevented from managing it because it lacks the legal capacity to do so, and, another by the Bank, in an erroneous application of numeral 12.2 of the CPCA. Throughout the entire process, the then Superintendente acted as the representative of the Bank; its attorneys came to clarify what is provided by law, in that the Institution was duly represented. Therefore, in fixing the costs, Article 73.3 of the CPC was not applicable, because there was no subjective plurality. The liquidation signed by the Ms. Superintendente was in the name of the Bank, which, it is reiterated, was the defendant for formal conduct of SUGEF. In accordance with the foregoing, the appealed resolution is revoked, so that the total amount definitively fixed is in favor of the BCCR, without an additional liquidation of costs being necessary.\"\n\nIt is understood that when a formal action of a deconcentrated body (órgano desconcentrado) is challenged or liability is claimed as a result of its activities, the entity or body to which it is attached must be sued. In the case of SUGEF, the legislator, also due to the specialized nature of its powers, ***decided that the representation of the Bank*** would fall to the Superintendente General de Entidades Financieras, as provided in Article 131.1) of the cited Organic Law:\n\n\"*Article 131- Functions of the superintendente general de entidades financieras*\n\n*The following functions shall correspond to the superintendente general de entidades financieras:*\n\n***a) Exercise, in the name and on behalf of the Banco Central de Costa Rica, the legal, judicial, and extrajudicial representation of said bank for the functions inherent to his office, with the powers of a general agent without limit of sum\"*. (The highlighting is not from the original).\n\nIt is the practice of litigants to sue both SUGEF and the Bank, the Tribunal presumes, assuming that the former has its own legal personality (personalidad jurídica). However, under proper legal technique, it would be appropriate to sue only the Bank for the formal conduct and operation of SUGEF. The Superintendente, pursuant to the LOBCCR rule, in the name of the Bank, would conduct the defense of the body's interests, in application of Article 17 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo (CPCA). Judges of the jurisdiction also participate in this confusion regarding assuming SUGEF's legal personality, as in this case, when the enforcement judge interpreted that a settlement (liquidación) needed to be made by SUGEF, which is prevented from managing it because it lacks the legal capacity to do so, and another by the Bank, in an erroneous application of numeral 12.2 of the CPCA. Throughout the entire process, the then Superintendente acted as the representative of the Bank, whose attorneys came to clarify what the law provides, in that the Institution was duly represented. Therefore, in the setting of costs, Article 73.3 of the CPC was not applicable, because there was no subjective plurality. The settlement signed by the Superintendent was in the name of the Bank, which, it is reiterated, was the party sued for formal conduct of SUGEF. In accordance with the foregoing, the challenged resolution is revoked, so that the entire amount ultimately set shall be in favor of the BCCR, without the need for an additional settlement of costs.\"\n\nThe maximum deconcentration (desconcentración) will exist when the inferior is also removed from orders, instructions, or circulars of the superior.\n\n4. The impossibility of reviewing or substituting the inferior's conduct will cause the power to review it to be presumed, and vice versa.\n\n5. Norms creating minimum deconcentration (desconcentración mínima) shall be restrictively applied against the competence of the deconcentrated organ, and those creating maximum deconcentration (desconcentración máxima) shall be broadly applied in its favor.\"\n\nNevertheless, maximum deconcentration does not imply that the organ has its own legal personality; it continues to depend on the entity to which it is attached, which has the legal capacity for its representation (capacity to be a party), as well as to bring judicial actions in defense of its interests (active standing) and to defend itself against claims brought against it (passive standing). Within the Public Administration, both centralized and decentralized, there exist deconcentrated organs without their own legal personality, represented for judicial purposes by the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic (Procuraduría General de la República), such as, for example, the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA), an organ of maximum deconcentration of the Ministry of Environment or, as in this case, SUGEF, which would be represented by BCCR. It is understood that when a formal action of a deconcentrated organ is challenged or liability is claimed as a result of its activities, the claim must be brought against the entity or organ to which it is attached. In the case of SUGEF, the legislator, also on account of the specialized nature of its competencies, decided that the Bank's representation would fall to the Superintendente General de Entidades Financieras, as provided in Article 131.1) of the Organic Law cited:\n\n\"Artículo 131- Functions of the superintendente general de entidades financieras\n\nThe following functions shall correspond to the superintendente general de entidades financieras:\n\na) Exercise, in the name and on account of the Banco Central de Costa Rica, the legal, judicial, and extrajudicial representation of said bank for the functions proper to his office, with the powers of a generalísimo proxy without limit of sum\". (Highlighting not in the original).\n\nIt is the practice of litigants to sue both SUGEF and the Bank, the Tribunal presumes, assuming that the former holds its own legal personality. However, according to proper legal technique, it would be necessary to sue only the Bank for the formal conduct and operation of SUGEF. The Superintendente, pursuant to the LOBCCR provision, in the name of the Bank, would conduct the defense of the organ’s interests, applying Article 17 of the Administrative Contentious Procedural Code (CPCA). The judges of the jurisdiction also participate in this confusion regarding the legal personality of SUGEF, as in this case, when the enforcing judge interpreted that a liquidation (liquidación) was necessary on the part of SUGEF, which is barred from processing it because it lacks the legal capacity to do so, and another on the part of the Bank, in an erroneous application of numeral 12.2 of the CPCA. Throughout the entire proceeding, the then Superintendente acted as the representative of the Bank; its attorneys came to clarify what the law provides, that the Institution was duly represented. Therefore, in fixing costs, Article 73.3 of the CPC was not applicable, because there was no subjective plurality. The liquidation signed by the Superintendente was on behalf of the Bank, which, it is reiterated, was the defendant for formal conduct of SUGEF. In accordance with the foregoing, the challenged resolution is revoked, so that the entirety of the amount that is finally set is in favor of BCCR, without the need for an additional liquidation of costs.\""
}