During January 2008 and January 2014, Peru and Chile lived a dispute in the International Court of Justice. Although the ruling did not give everything Peru request, this country achieved incorporated a new maritime space at the expense of Chile. In this six years, arose the hypothesis that the Court's decision would be a turning point that would change a confrontational and inconstancy relationship to new bilateral relationship with cooperative structure. The hypothesis was not approved, because immediately a new conflict arose, the called "terrestrial triangle" which eliminated the thesis of the inflection point. In view of the above, this article explains why it was not possible to comply with the turning point, because of the terrestrial triangle. The analysis of the turning point includes the main events of this bilateral relationship, it explaining in this way, why a triangle of 3,7 hectares has a qualitative value bigger than to change a bilateral relationship characterized by its inconstancy.