Concurso Magistratura CABA common mistakes
Concurso Magistratura CABA · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Applying the general national civil and commercial codes to a hypothetical without first checking whether the CABA Legislature has competence and whether a local statute (e.g., Consumer Protection Law 24.240 as locally enforced, or the CABA Civil and Commercial Code reservations) displaces or complements it.
Candidates study the national codes in isolation and treat CABA as a mere enforcement venue, forgetting the autonomy framework of art. 129 CN and the 1996 CABA Constitution.
What to do instead
Before solving any civil/commercial hypothetical, write the competence chain: CN art. 75 inc. 12 vs. art. 129, CABA Constitution arts. 1 and 80, then the applicable local law. Only then select the substantive rule.
Answering administrative questions by invoking only the national Administrative Procedure Law 19.549 when the case arises before a CABA agency, instead of the local procedure regime (CABA Law 2.164 and its amendments) and the CABA Administrative Procedure Code context.
Law 19.549 is the canonical text in most prep materials, so candidates reflexively apply it to any 'administrative act' fact pattern.
What to do instead
Build a one-page comparison table of national vs. CABA procedural rules (silence, nullity, revocation, appeal deadlines) and, on every fact pattern, first identify the agency's jurisdiction.
Treating the CABA Constitution as a preamble-style document and citing only the national Constitution in constitutional questions about local institutions (Comuna, Consejo de la Magistratura, Jefe de Gobierno, legislative procedure).
The national Constitution dominates the syllabus and the CABA Constitution's institutional detail is perceived as secondary.
What to do instead
Memorize the CABA Constitution's institutional architecture by article (arts. 1, 52-67 on the Executive, 68-77 on the Legislature, 106-113 on the Judiciary, 127-130 on Comunas) and practise citing it as primary authority.
In criminal procedure problems, applying the national Code of Criminal Procedure (Law 23.984) to a case under CABA jurisdiction instead of the CABA Code of Criminal Procedure (Law 2.303), and misapplying the adversarial system's hearing structure.
The national code is the reference text in many courses, and the 2019 CABA transition to an adversarial system is under-studied.
What to do instead
Study Law 2.303 article by article for the stages (investigation, intermediate, trial), the role of the fiscal and defensor, and the coercive measures; solve at least ten fact patterns expressly under CABA jurisdiction.
Confusing the concepts of 'competence' and 'jurisdiction' in administrative and constitutional questions, or failing to distinguish the CABA Supreme Court's original jurisdiction from its appellate and casación roles.
Terminology overlaps across domains and study materials use the words interchangeably.
What to do instead
Write a glossary entry for each term with the governing article (CN arts. 116-117; CABA Constitution arts. 113-114) and test it against past CABA Superior Court decisions.
In labour and social security questions, applying the national Labour Contract Law 20.744 without checking the CABA collective agreements, the local labour procedure (Law 4.926 and its amendments) and the interaction with CABA social security and inspection powers.
National labour law is the default study object, and CABA's local labour jurisdiction is treated as procedural trivia.
What to do instead
Map the labour question into three layers: national substantive law, CABA procedural law, and local inspection/social security rules; practise identifying which layer the question actually tests.
Answering constitutional control questions by citing only 'constitutional supremacy' without specifying the concrete diffuse-control mechanism, the standing requirements, and the effect of the declaration of unconstitutionality in the CABA system.
Candidates memorize slogans ('supremacy', 'diffuse control') without the operative doctrine from 'Marbury' through 'Ekmekdjian' and CABA case law.
What to do instead
Prepare a control checklist: standing, case or controversy, applicable standard, effect inter partes vs. erga omnes, and the CABA Supreme Court's role; write a model answer for each control type.
In penal problems, conflating the substantive offence elements (e.g., art. 79 vs. art. 80 CP, or the CABA contravencional regime) with the procedural burden of proof, and failing to identify which regime (CABA contravencional law vs. national Penal Code) applies to the facts.
The CABA contravencional system (Law 1.472 and related) is a distinct body of law that candidates treat as a footnote to the Penal Code.
What to do instead
For every penal fact pattern, first classify the conduct as crime (national jurisdiction) or contravention (CABA), then apply the corresponding substantive and procedural rules; build a classification table.
Writing answers that state the rule but omit the application to the facts, producing generic doctrinal paragraphs that do not resolve the hypothetical.
Exam preparation emphasizes memorization of doctrine and the time pressure of the written exam discourages structured application.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed answer template: (1) identify the legal issue, (2) state the rule with article and source, (3) apply to the specific facts, (4) conclude. Practise under timed conditions with a word budget per section.
Ignoring the hierarchy of sources and the block of constitutionality, citing international human rights treaties only when expressly asked, instead of integrating them into ordinary constitutional, civil, and labour reasoning.
The block of constitutionality (art. 75 inc. 22 CN) is studied as a separate topic rather than as an operative tool in every domain.
What to do instead
For each domain, list the relevant treaty provisions (e.g., American Convention, ICESCR, ILO conventions for labour) and practise inserting them into answers where they modify the domestic rule, citing the corresponding CABA constitutional provisions.