Preferencias académicas de los estudiantes de la carrera de Derecho y su vinculación con los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) a través del estudio de sentencia

Abstract

Abstract:The plaintiff presents an extraordinary action for protection against a ruling issued on December 28, 2011, by the Fourteenth Civil and Commercial Judge of Milagro, through which the claim is granted to her spouse, within a summary verbal trial of divorce. The plaintiff, in the main, states that an examination of the facts alleged by the plaintiff was not carried out and she was not required to demonstrate the steps that the plaintiff took to verify the lack of knowledge of her address. Without proving the lack of knowledge of his address, the oath was taken and an order was ordered to qualify the claim and that the summons be made by the press. This meant that the plaintiff was unaware of the existence of said process and therefore was unable to present any type of ordinary appeal to correct the violations of her right to defense. The Constitutional Court considers that the ruling of December 28, 2011, issued by the fourteenth civil and commercial judge of Milagro, in the verbal summary divorce trial 428-2011, violated the right to effective judicial protection of the plaintiff, recognized in article 75 of the Constitution of the Republic.