SECRETARY:

. EXP. :
NOTEBOOK: Main
. WRITTEN: 01
SUMILLA: DEMAND FOR PAYMENT OF PARTICIPATION IN PROFITS FROM NATIONAL
SOURCE AND FOREIGN SOURCE.

JUDGE OF THE SPECIALIZED LABOR COURT OF LIMA:

WILMER LAVALLE BACA, Identified with DNI No. 03898806, with real address at Juan
Fuentes 315 301 Surco - Lima; indicating as the procedural domicile at Calle Las Tordillas
164 San Isidro - Lima, and Casilla Electrónica N ° 64907; to you, respectfully, I say:

I.- DEFENDANT'S DATA:

● Company PETREX S.A., identified with RUC N ° 20103744211, duly represented by Mr.
Paolo Scotti, who must be summoned with this lawsuit at their fiscal address at Av.
República de Panamá 3050 San Isidro - Lima.
● GRUPO SAIPEM, who should be summoned with the present lawsuit at their fiscal
domicile at Vía Martiri Cefalonia 67,20097 San Donato Milanese Ml, Italy.

II.- PETITION
In original objective accumulation:

➢ As the main claim, WE FILE LABOR CLAIM for the PAYMENT OF THE PARTICIPATION IN
THE PROFITS OF NATIONAL SOURCE AND FOREIGN SOURCE of the defendant company
PETREX S.A AND the SAIPEM GROUP in the total sum of S /. 68,656.40 (Sixty-Eight
Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-Six and 40/100 Soles) for domestic source earnings, plus the
amount for foreign source earnings that will be settled according to the annual income tax
returns that must be submitted the defendant for the periods 1997 to 2017.
I reserve the amount to increase the amount, because the share of profits from foreign
sources must be calculated.

➢ As an accessory claim, the payment of the legal labor interest for arrears, costs and
costs of the process is provided.

III.- FACTS

III.1.- DATA OF THE LABOR RELATIONSHIP

From the worker: Wilmer Lavalle Baca.

ADMISSION DATE 11/07/1997
CESSATION DATE 12/13/2017
REASON FOR DISMISSAL Fraudulent dismissal
POSITION PERFORMED Warehouse Manager
LAST REMUNERATION S /. 5,197.35
1
TYPE OF REMUNERATION Fixed

III.2.- FACTUAL BASES

FIRST: PETREX S.A. is a 100% SAIPEM GROUP company that operates in South America
since 1983, with a fleet of more than seventy equipment including Drilling (Oil & Gas and
Geothermal), Workover and Pulling distributed in Peru, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador,
Bolivia, Chile and Argentina. A large number of Teams and a long experience in South
America, together with the support of SAIPEM's corporate office in Italy.

SECOND: PETREX S.A, is a company subject to the labor regime of private activity that
develops third-category income-generating activities, such as being a company that carries
out drilling and maintenance service activities for oil wells.

THIRD.- It is the case that on the date of my termination (fraudulent dismissal) I have been
paid my social benefits, without payment of the participation in the profits of the
defendant companies, according to law .

THIRD: That, on November 11, 1996, Legislative Decree No. 892 was issued, which modifies
Legislative Decree No. 677; that device in its third and final repealing complementary
provision of Legislative Decree No. 892, which literally says “This Legislative Decree enters
into force on the 1st. January 1997 ”. That, this same Legislative Decree contains with
respect to the payment of Utilities the same percentage as that stipulated in the D.L. No.
677, that is, 5% of the percentage of the Annual Income before tax, which contains it in its
2nd Art.

FOURTH: Faced with the breach by the site, of the payment for the concept of profits,
object of the lawsuit, I have required it for compliance by means of a notarized letter sent
to the company PETREX S.A. and by email dated 06.20.2020, an Extrajudicial Letter was
sent to Italy to the corporate email of the SAIPEM GROUP in order for it to comply with
paying me the profit sharing that by law corresponds to me (attached printout of the email
sent to SAIPEM GROUP), but both defendants have not given me a positive answer; so you
are denying me my right. This forces me to resort to judicial means in search of Legal
Protection, so that your office can order the payment of the concept that is the object of
my demand, which by law corresponds to me

FIFTH: INCOME FROM FOREIGN SOURCE:

The doctrine establishes, as a general rule, Income from Foreign Source is added to the
Income from Work and the tax is paid at the time of filing the Annual Tax Return. Said
income is added and compensated among themselves and only if a net income results from
said operations, will it be added to the Peruvian source income. These income from foreign
sources are not categorized and are considered for income tax purposes as long as they
have been received.

2
SIXTH: On the other hand, the RTF No. 00859-2-2018 issued by the Tax Court dated
February 1, 2018, relayed in File No. 7417-2017, establishes with respect to the net income
of national and foreign sources : “That in this regard, from the aforementioned norms,
taxpayers domiciled in the country who obtain income from Peruvian and foreign sources
should determine separately the results of each of the aforementioned sources, likewise,
they could only compensate the positive results foreign source against Peruvian source
losses or add them to the positive results of the latter, being that said result will constitute
the global net income on which the tax of the corresponding taxable year will be
calculated, specifying that the total net losses of the source year In no case may they be
offset against the net income of the Peruvian source to determine the aforementioned tax.
"

SEVENTH: Also Resolution No. 00859-2-2018, determines and resolves: Regarding the
payment not made by taxes from foreign sources; which the declared financial statements
do not correspond to the payment of profits that should have been granted to the workers.
In accordance with this, our Political Constitution of Peru, as a rule of higher hierarchy, has
established the right of workers to participate in the profits of the company, in accordance
with Legislative Decree 892 regulates the right of workers subject to the regime of private
activity, to participate in the profits of companies that carry out third-category income-
generating activities.

EIGHTH: In accordance with Article 4 of Legislative Decree 892, the profit sharing is
calculated on the balance of taxable income for the taxable year that results after offsetting
losses from previous years in accordance with income tax regulations. In turn, Article 51 of
the same rule refers to "Taxpayers domiciled in the country will add and compensate each
other the results produced by their foreign income producing sources, and only if a net
income results from said operations, it will be added to the national net income, it will be
added to the net income from work or to the net business income of Peruvian source, as
appropriate, determined in accordance with articles 49 and 50 of this law. "

NINTH: According to the Political Constitution of Peru, Article 29 states: "That, the State
recognizes the right of workers to participate in the profits of the company and promotes
other forms of participation." Likewise, Article 49 , 50, 51; of Decree 892 and Law No.
28873, in which the standards cited in these articles state that the basis for calculating the
Profits to be distributed in favor of the workers is the balance of the Taxable Income. And
the conclusion of the Ministry of Labor in report N ° 034-2012-MTPE / 2/14, specifies that
the results produced by its sources that produce foreign income will result in a net income,
the same that will add to the business income of the Peruvian source .

TENTH: This being the case, the sum of the net income from foreign sources of the
companies that carry out third category income generating activities will result in the
taxable income for the taxable year on which the workers' participation will be calculated.
As long as the aforementioned laws protect us as workers in the participation of profits
from foreign sources.

3
ELEVENTH: Therefore, we request the participation of profits from the net income from
foreign sources obtained by the branches abroad of the company PETREX SA and the
SAIPEM GROUP for all the years demanded, which I have not yet benefited from obtaining
profits of the branches of Venezuela, Panama, Argentina and Chile, consequently, SUNAT
must be notified in order to report on the sworn declarations of income tax from foreign
sources declared by the company PETREX SA and the SAIPEM GROUP by the demanded
periods from 1997 to 2017.

TWELFTH: In this way, the amount consigned on the payment of the participation of the
profits of national source from the periods 1997 to 2017 is justified in Annex 1-B of this
lawsuit, without prejudice to the fact that your office provides for the realization of an
accounting report carried out by the experts assigned to the labor courts, in accordance
with the provisions of art. 28 of the New Labor Procedure Law.

THIRTEENTH: On the other hand, recently the Tax Court has determined as Unfounded the
Claim sustained regarding the losses of Petrex SA in foreign source income for the periods
2009, 2010, and 2012, in which the compensation of losses of the National Source Income,
the same that must be treated separately:
FILE No. 04401-2018-EJE
RESOLUTION No. 18
Lima, December 26, 2019.
SEEN:
With the Electronic Judicial File (EJE) and the administrative file digitized in 3186 pages, this
Collegiate Superior is informed of the appeals, from pages 267 to 275 and 277 to 283, filed
by the co-defendant administrative entities, NATIONAL SUPERINTENDENCE OF CUSTOMS
AND TAX ADMINISTRATION - SUNAT and the FISCAL COURT, respectively; Against the
judgment signed with Resolution No. 10, dated September 30, 2019, from pages 249 to
261, which declares the claim founded. The Senior Judge LENIN MANRIQUE MONTORO
RODRÍGUEZ intervened as rapporteur; and, CONSIDERING:

FIRST.- Basis of the grievances invoked by the appellant entities. SUNAT expresses, in
summary, as the main arguments of its appeal, the following:
(i) The judgment of first instance incurs in lack of motivation and in contradictions, since it
makes an erroneous interpretation of articles 50 °, 51 ° and 57 ° of the Income Tax Law LIR,
as well as article 29-A of its Regulations; interpretation that led the court to conclude that
the plaintiff could compensate for her losses from a foreign source from previous years for
Sumilla purposes.- In the present case, it is concluded that the contested administrative
decision has been duly motivated, while the reasons in those that support their decision
contain the factual support and, in addition, an evaluative examination has been carried
out in accordance with the applicable legal framework, adequately expressing the reasons
that support their decision, so that the impact on the right of motivation or the principle of
due procedure is not noticed ; consequently, it is not immersed in the grounds for nullity
set forth in Article 10 of Law No. 27444, which makes the claim unfounded; and, having the
lower instance ruled in the opposite sense, it corresponds to revoke the sentence come in
degree.
4
(i) The A-quo incurs in gross error by basing its judgment on wrong assessments, since it
has erroneously interpreted article 51, paragraph c) of article 57 of the Income Tax Law,
and article 29 -A of its Regulations, since, contrary to what is stated in the contested
judgment, taxpayers domiciled in the country who obtain income from Peruvian and
foreign sources shall determine separately the results of each of the aforementioned
sources. Likewise, said taxpayers can only offset the positive results from a foreign source
against the losses from Peruvian source or add them to the positive results of the latter,
being that said result will constitute the global net income on which the tax of the
corresponding taxable year will be calculated. , specifying that the total net losses of the
exercise from a foreign source may in no case be offset against the net income from a
Peruvian source to determine the aforementioned tax.
(ii) Compensation for losses from previous years is expressly recognized in article 50 of the
Income Tax Law and article 29 of its Regulations only in the case of income from national
sources, but not for foreign source income. As an exception, Article 50 of the Income Tax
Law grants the right to compensation for the total net loss of third category of Peruvian
source generated in previous years, against the net income obtained in
others, deduction that is subject to compliance with certain rules, as provided for in the
systems included in paragraphs a) and b) of the indicated article 50, being that such
exception cannot be extended or applied to other cases not contemplated in the
mentioned law, either because it is other categories of income, income from specific
sources or income from a foreign source, as is the case in the present case. In this sense, it
was appropriate to confirm the repair made by the Administration to the deduction of
losses from foreign sources of previous years (2009 and 2010) from the Income Tax for the
year 2012, since: a) the application of losses from foreign sources, in accordance with the
provisions of article 51 of the income tax law; and, b) even less, it was appropriate to
consider tax losses from foreign sources, from years prior to the year being analyzed, in
accordance with the provisions of article 57 of the Income Tax Law.

FOURTEENTH: Finally, it is important to emphasize that the National Superintendency of

Labor Inspection - SUNAFIL, Municipality of Metropolitan Lima in Sanctioning File No. 350-
2015-SUNAFIL has issued Sub-Intendance Resolution No. 322-2016-SUNAFIL, which you
have to sanction the company PETREX SA with the sum of S /. 56,332.50 soles for failing to
comply with labor violations.
The aforementioned Resolution refers to the fact that the inspected subject, that is, the
company PETREX S.A. for fiscal year 2012, it calculated an amount of profit sharing that is
less than the one it should have distributed and while in fiscal year 2013 the company did
not distribute profits, amounts from foreign sources; It also concludes that for the
calculation of the net tax income base for the purposes of calculating profits if it is possible
to consider income from a foreign source, it is thus, taking into account that the base for
the participation in the profits destined to workers has as a substrate Income Tax
Legislation, Art. 51 of the Income Tax Law makes it clear that taxpayers receiving business
income domiciled in Peru will pay taxes on the income generated within the country,
adding to them the foreign income that it generated.

5
Therefore, SUNAFIL, resolves to sanction the company PETREX S.A. with the sum of S /.
56,332.50 soles for failing to comply with infractions in labor matters and requires the
same to comply with correcting the infractions incurred in the following way:
i) Accredit the full payment of the profit sharing for 2012, in favor of the workers.
ii) Accredit the payment of profit sharing for 2013, in favor of the workers.

FIFTEENTH: Therefore, we request the participation of profits from the net income from
foreign sources obtained by the branches abroad of the company PETREX SA and the
SAIPEM Group of all the years of the demanded periods, which I have not yet benefited
from obtaining profits from the branches, with respect to the sworn statements of income
tax from foreign sources declared by the company for the periods from 1997 to 2017.

IV.- FOUNDATIONS OF LAW

It is support of this claim:
Legislative Decree 892.
- Article 2, by which "They regulate the right of workers to participate in the profits of
companies that carry out third-category income activities", which indicates "The workers of
the companies included in this Legislative Decree participate in the profits of the company,
through the distribution by the latter of a percentage of the annual income before taxes. …
”. In the present case, there has been no distribution of a percentage of the company's
profits to me, a situation that motivates the filing of this lawsuit.

New Labor Procedure Law

- Art. 16, on demand requirements.

Tax court.
- RTF N ° 00859-2-2018 issued by the Tax Court dated February 1, 2018 establishes with
respect to the net income from national and foreign sources.

V.- AMOUNT OF THE REQUEST

The amount of the petition amounts to the sum of S /. 68,656.40 (Sixty-Eight Thousand Six
Hundred Fifty-Six with 40/100 Soles) for profits from national sources, plus the amount for
profits from foreign sources, plus legal interest, costs and costs of the process.

VI.- PROCEDURAL ROUTE

This claim must be processed through the Ordinary Labor Process, in accordance with art. 2
of the New Labor Procedure Law.

VII.- PROBATORY MEANS

DOCUMENTARY:
1. Payment slips, issued by the summons, in favor of the appellant; to prove my
employment relationship with said location.
2. Copy of the RTF N ° 00859-2-2018 issued by the Tax Court dated February 1, 2018
establishes with respect to the net income of national and foreign source, to better support
my right to have my claim declared founded .
6
3. Notarial letter sent to the company PETREX S.A., with which we certify that a Profit
Sharing of the Net Income of Foreign Source obtained by the Foreign Branches of the
defendant Company was requested.
4. Copy of Sub-Intendancy Resolution No. 322-2016-SUNAFIL, issued by SUNAFIL -
Municipality of Metropolitan Lima dated 12/02/2016, in order to prove that the defendant
PETREX S.A. was sanctioned for failing to comply with the labor provisions regarding the
participation of foreign source profits in favor of its workers.
5. Spreadsheet of national source profit sharing, which proves that the defendants owe this
benefit to the plaintiff.
6. Printed sheet of the mail sent to the corporate email of the SAIPEM GROUP dated
06/20/2020, attached the extrajudicial letter requesting the payment of the share of profits
that correspond to me.

EXHIBITIONAL: I offer the following:

7. Exhibition that the defendant must make of the Ballots or payment receipts for the years
1997 until 2017, thereby accrediting the concepts of profits made to me for the periods
demanded, exhibition that must be made under the warning of being taken for granted.
that he has not paid me this concept during the period claiming the amount of the request,
8. Exhibitional to be made by the defendant of the Annual Income Tax Affidavit from 1997
to 2017; duly presented and received by SUNAT, with which the profits generated in the
requested period will be credited; exhibition that must be carried out under penalty and /
or the amount indicated in the amount of the petition must be taken for granted.
9. Exhibition of the Economic Balances of the legalized years, this to accredit and / or
demonstrate the Profits that the defendant has obtained, under warning of law.
10. Official to SUNAT, in order to report on the income taxes from foreign sources such as
Venezuela, Panama, Argentina and Chile declared by the company PETREX SA and the
SAIPEM GROUP, this to accredit the profits generated by the defendants by the periods
1993 to 2017

EXPERTISE:
11. That the Accounting Expertise Unit of the Superior Court of Lima must carry out, so
that, in view of the required documents, as evidence of the claim (since these documents
are not in our possession); the real amount for Profits is determined, whether from a
Peruvian source or a foreign source; this in order to prove the existence of profits in favor
of the plaintiff.

VIII.- ANNEXES
1-A.- Copy of my National Identity Document.
1-B.- Payment slips, issued by the summons, in favor of the appellant; to prove my
employment relationship with said location.
1.C.- Copy of the RTF The RTF N ° 00859-2-2018 issued by the Tax Court dated February 1,
2018
1.D.- Copy of the Notarial Letter sent to the company PETREX S.A.
1.E.- Copy of Sub-Intendancy Resolution No. 322-2016-SUNAFIL, issued by SUNAFIL -
Municipality of Metropolitan Lima dated 02.12.2016
7
1.F.- National source profit sharing calculation sheet
1.G.- Printed sheet of the mail sent to the corporate email of the SAIPEM GROUP dated
06/20/2020, attached the extrajudicial letter.
1.H.- Judicial Fee and Notification Certificates.

FIRST OTHER SIDIGO:

That, in accordance with Article 74 ° and 80 ° of the Civil Procedure Code of supplementary
application to this case, we grant legal powers to the attorneys who sign the present
because they are premunded with the powers of law.

FOR THE EXPOSED:

I ask you. Mr. Judge, please admit this demand, process it according to law and in due time
declare it FOUNDED in all its extremes and provide according to law.

Lima, July 9, 2020.