Motivación de sentencias emitidas por los jueces de primer nivel en el Ecuad

Abstract

Abstract: This study analyzes the legal reasoning in ruling issued by first-level judges in Ecuador, using as a case study judment No. 17230-2018-01949. Through an analytical methodology, it examines the normative and factual arguments employed by the judge in a claim for the collection of a check protested for a closed account, emphasizing that the negotiable instrument never loses its legal nature, even when its enforceability is questioned. The study identifies the differences between correct and sufficient reasoning and evaluates whether the judicial decision meets the standards established in the Constitution of Ecuador (CRE), the Organic Monetary and Financial Code (COMF), AND THE Organic General Code F Procedures (COGEP). The research concludes that, while the ruling includes valid grounds that support the decision, it also presents certain argumentative gaps that affect the quality of legal motivation. Nevertheless, it is considered that no severe deficiency justifies its annulment. This analysis contributes to the reflection on transparency, rationality, and legitimacy in the issuance of judicial decisions within the Ecuadorian legal system.