Motivación en las sentencias emitidas por los jueces de primer nivel en Ecuador

Abstract

Abstract: This paper analyzes judicial motivation in Ecuador through a detailed study of Judgment No. 18332-2023-02408. This document describes a claim for compensation for moral damages arising from a voluntary acknowledgment of paternity that was subsequently challenged. For this case study, the EL SER method and the argumentation criteria proposed by Atienza were applied to represent, examine, and evaluate the logical structure of the ruling, as well as its correspondence with current constitutional and procedural standards. The doctrinal and jurisprudential analysis demonstrates that sufficient and correct motivation is an essential requirement to guarantee due process, judicial transparency, and the validity of decisions. Therefore, in the case studied, the judge determined that there was no unlawful act attributable to the defendant, nor sufficient evidence to prove compensable moral damages, which led to a ruling in favor of the defendant. Thus, according to the case analysis, the results show that the decision is legally sound, although it reveals interpretive challenges regarding the proof of moral damages and the requirement of causality in family and affective contexts. Finally, the study contributes to the understanding of judicial reasoning and the consolidation of criteria for motivation within the Ecuadorian legal system.