Introduction
While several South American countries already recognize same-sex marriage, including Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Colombia, Peru still does not yet provide a specific legal framework for it.
However, this does not mean that same-sex couples are left without legal protection. In practice, important legal mechanisms already exist that allow foreign marriages to be recognized in specific contexts, particularly in property transactions.
With the right legal approach, it is possible to ensure that a valid marriage celebrated abroad is respected in Peru, not by registering it locally, but by acknowledging the real civil status of the parties involved.
In this article, we examine how Peruvian authorities, particularly the Administrative Tribunal of SUNARP and the Constitutional Court, have interpreted foreign same-sex marriages, and how these interpretations interact with broader legal developments in South America, including civil unions and marriage equality.
We focus specifically on the registration of property acquisitions in Peru and the question of whether a same-sex couple legally married abroad can be recognized as “married” in the Land Registry, without seeking to register the marriage itself in Peru.
The analysis is based on cases involving foreign spouses who are citizens and residents of the country where their marriage was validly celebrated.
1. Purpose and scope, preliminary issue, and a very frustrating experience. The struggle must continue.
The purpose of this report is to demonstrate, based on statutory law, case law, and principles of international law, that it is indeed appropriate to record the true marital status of the purchasers as “married” when the marriage has been validly celebrated abroad, even if, as of March 3, 2026, there is no formal procedure in Peru for the registration of same-sex marriages as such.
The act to be registered is the purchase of real property, and the indication of marital status constitutes a legally relevant element for the registry entry, not the registration of the marriage itself as a principal act.
In this context, an incorrect interpretation arises when a valid marriage, fully recognized in the place where it was celebrated (in the United States), between two persons of the same sex who were citizens and residents of that country at the time is disregarded. Such a marriage is fully valid, and in accordance with the international treaties to which Peru is a party, as well as the provisions of the Peruvian Civil Code, the place of celebration is the correct criterion for determining its validity.
A registry official, a commercial agent of a construction company, or a notarial employee has no legal basis to incorrectly claim that such a legal act is invalid, nor to require the parties to declare their marital status as “single,” which is entirely inconsistent with reality. This practice is often justified by the fear of potential objections during the registration process, particularly in the context of subdividing a multi-unit building under the horizontal property regime.
2. Fundamental legal clarification
A clear distinction must be made between:
The registration of a foreign marriage in Peru
The recognition of a pre-existing marital status as an identifying element in a property-related act
In the present case, we are dealing with the second scenario.
The registrar is not “creating” a marriage in Peru. Rather, the registrar is assessing a property title in which two individuals appear who already hold a marital status validly acquired under another legal system.
2.1 Registry-related legal issue
The question arises whether, when a purchase agreement is submitted in favor of two persons of the same sex who are married abroad, the registrar may object to the indication of the marital status “married” on the grounds of international public policy or the domestic definition of marriage; or whether, on the contrary, the registrar must recognize the effects of the foreign marriage for the purposes of reviewing and registering the property title.
3. Applicable legal framework (Peru)
3.1. Constitution – interpretation in accordance with human rights treaties
The Fourth Final and Transitory Provision requires that rights and freedoms be interpreted in accordance with human rights treaties ratified by Peru. This criterion has been cited and developed in the Constitutional Court’s judgment in the Ugarteche case.
3.2. Private International Law – primacy of treaties
The Civil Code (Book on Private International Law) establishes that the applicable law is determined, first, by international treaties ratified by Peru and, subsidiarily, by the internal provisions of that same book.
3.3. General criterion regarding marriages celebrated abroad (civil case law)
There is a line of civil case law addressing the validity and effectiveness of marriages celebrated abroad, as well as their treatment in registry and consular proceedings, which is useful to reinforce the recognition of a foreign legal act.
4. International treaties and standards (Peru as a State Party)
4.1. American Convention on Human Rights (Pact of San José)
Adoption: 11/22/1969
Peru – ratification: by Legislative Decree No. 22231 (07/11/1978) and deposit on 07/28/1978
Key provisions: Art. 1.1 (obligation to respect and guarantee rights without discrimination), Art. 24 (equality before the law), and Art. 17 (protection of the family, relevant in a systematic interpretation)
4.2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
Adoption: 12/16/1966
Peru – ratification status (UN): official record of ratification for Peru (UN source)
Key provisions:
Art. 2 (non-discrimination and guarantee)
Art. 26 (equality before the law)
These provisions are used as standards of equality, particularly when domestic authorities apply an interpretation consistent with international law.
4.3. Inter-American Court of Human Rights – Advisory Opinion OC-24/17 (11/24/2017)
Date: 11/24/2017
Relevance: establishes standards on equality and non-discrimination, as well as the State’s obligation to provide legal protection to family relationships without discrimination, forming a strong basis for what is known as “conventionality control.”
5. Jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Peru (binding as a constitutional standard)
Case No. 01739-2018-PA/TC – Plenary Judgment No. 676/2020 (Ugarteche case)
Official document of the Constitutional Court:
The Constitutional Court frames the debate within an interpretation consistent with international treaties.
Although the ruling is known for declaring the claim inadmissible, the text itself is useful to support that constitutional analysis cannot be isolated from the system of human rights and the principle of conventionality (a framework argument, not a result-based one).
6. SUNARP Registry Tribunal – relevant decisions and registry criteria on “international public policy”
6.1. Resolution No. 1868-2016-SUNARP-TR-L (same-sex marriage celebrated in Belgium)
Central criterion (clear and directly applicable): the Registry Tribunal establishes that a marriage validly celebrated abroad should not be disregarded on the basis of sexual orientation, and that no incompatibility with international public policy arises solely for that reason (this is key to supporting the inclusion of the marital status “married” in the registry entry).
Here is the link to the full decision of the SUNARP Registry Tribunal:
https://img.lpderecho.pe/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/1868-2016-SUNARP-TR-L.pdf
If the second-instance body, after the registrar rejected the registration in the name of the same-sex couple, has already determined that there is no automatic conflict with international public policy, the registry objection loses its legal basis.
6.2. On “ROB / Binding Precedents”
SUNARP publishes and updates the Compendium of Binding Precedents (ROB/precedents) within its institutional collection.
Important technical point:
Binding precedents (ROB) are approved in plenary sessions and issued by resolution; they are mandatory. In practice, however, there is not always a specific precedent applicable to every particular case or issue (such as same-sex marriages celebrated abroad). Therefore, the legal argument is based on:
International treaties and conventionality control
Constitutional Court case law
Registry jurisprudence (decisions of the Registry Tribunal), particularly Resolution No. 1868-2016-SUNARP-TR-L:
https://img.lpderecho.pe/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/1868-2016-SUNARP-TR-L.pdf
7. Proposed registry thesis (our position)
The purchase of the property should be registered in favor of both acquirers, recording their marital status as “married,” when:
The marriage has been validly celebrated in accordance with the law of the place of celebration and the domicile or effective citizenship of the parties (a fact that can be evidenced by the marriage certificate, duly apostilled and, if applicable, translated into Spanish).
The marriage certificate is submitted in compliance with the applicable international formalities (legalization through apostille and translation, if applicable). It should be noted that any document issued abroad is valid for six (6) months from its date of issuance.
The intention is not to register the marriage as an autonomous act in Peru, but to recognize its existence as a legally relevant fact for the registration of the property right over the real estate being acquired.
A refusal based on “international public policy” is not automatic and, according to the criteria of the Registry Tribunal, no incompatibility arises solely because the marriage is between persons of the same sex.
8. Practical recommendation to be included in the purchase agreement, to be reproduced as a statement by the buyers
It is recommended to attach and/or specify in the notarial record (or in a corrective submission, if applicable):
A foreign marriage certificate duly apostilled or legalized and, where applicable, officially translated.
An explicit statement: “The inclusion of the marital status ‘married’ is requested solely as an identifying element derived from a valid foreign marriage; no registration of the marriage is requested in the Peruvian Civil Registry (RENIEC).”
If the foreign marriage establishes a property regime, it should be specified (separation of property, community property, or other), or the corresponding supporting document should be attached.
The following table aims to illustrate the evolution across the ten (10) South American countries, from civil unions to same-sex marriage, including the dates on which each legal framework entered into force.
| Country | Civil Union / Equivalent | Same-Sex Marriage |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | CABA Law 1004 (Civil Union): 12/12/2002 | Law 26.618: 15/07/2010 (published 22/07/2010) |
| Uruguay | Law 18.246 (Concubinage Union): 27/12/2007 | Law 19.075: 03/05/2013 |
| Brazil | Stable union (judicial/administrative recognition) | CNJ Resolution 175: 14/05/2013 |
| Chile | Law 20.830 (Civil Union Agreement): 2015 | Law 21.400: 09/12/2021 (in force 10/03/2022) |
| Colombia | Progressive recognition by Constitutional Court | Recognized by judicial decision |
| Ecuador | De facto union in Constitution (2008) | Constitutional Court ruling: 12/06/2019 |
| Bolivia | “Unión Libre” approved (2023), precedents since 2020 | Not approved |
| Paraguay | Not approved | Not approved |
| Peru | Not approved | Not approved |
| Venezuela | Not approved | Not approved |
Final Reflections and professional commitment
As a final remark, I would like to state that the preparation of this report arises from a recent case in our office that unfortunately did not reach a successful outcome. For this, we wish to express our apologies and our respect, while also reaffirming our commitment, with the firm conviction that we will achieve the recognition of your true and only marital status: that of being married. This should take place without any restrictions, as it is fully consistent with the law of the place where the marriage was celebrated and with the international agreements that Peru, as a member state, is obliged to uphold and respect.
Finally, and no less important on a personal and emotional level, I would like to emphasize that the deepest respect for every human being, without any distinction, includes the right to freely choose and decide in the most intimate sphere of one’s life. This is a deeply personal decision that does not affect or harm anyone.
To you, Linda & Judy – and extending this message to all couples who have gone through the same frustrating situation in Peru – the commitment and the struggle must continue.
Sergio Vargas Crimi, Lima in March 2026
Same-Sex Marriage & Property in Peru: Frequently Asked Questions
Yes. Same-sex couples can legally purchase property in Peru. The main issue is not the purchase itself, but how their marital status is recorded in the Land Registry.
Peru does not currently have a legal framework for same-sex marriage. However, marriages validly celebrated abroad may still be recognized in specific legal contexts, such as property transactions.
Yes, if the marriage was legally celebrated abroad, it is possible to record the marital status as “married” in the property registry, even without registering the marriage in Peru.
No. It is not necessary to register the marriage in Peru. The marital status can be recognized as an existing legal fact for the purpose of the property transaction.
Typically, an apostilled marriage certificate is required. If the document is not in Spanish, an official translation may also be necessary.
In practice, this can happen due to incorrect interpretations. However, legal precedents indicate that a valid foreign same-sex marriage should not be rejected solely on that basis.
This usually happens due to caution or lack of clarity, as officials try to avoid potential registration objections. However, this practice is not legally correct.
By presenting proper documentation, clearly stating the legal scope (recognition, not registration of the marriage), and working with professionals familiar with this type of case.
Need Legal Guidance for Buying Property in Peru?
Buying property in Peru as a foreigner involves legal and tax complexities. A private consultation helps you avoid costly mistakes and ensures a smooth process from due diligence to signing.
Book your private consultation with Sergio Vargas to get clear, personalized guidance on every legal and tax aspect of your property purchase.
The session takes place via Zoom and can be conducted in English or Spanish.
Don’t miss out on important updates!
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter and get the latest articles on immigration, taxes, and real estate in Peru delivered straight to your inbox.
