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

Abstract

Abstract: In order to determine whether the reasoning supporting judgment No. 17985-2018-00446 (family, childhood, and adolescence) conforms to the Constitution and the COGEP (General Organic Code of Procedure), I examined it as a law student. To organize the facts, the legal norms, the meaning, and the outcome, I used the "being" technique. I also evaluated the concept of adequate reasoning and the criteria for sufficient reasoning. In my opinion, the judge applies the relevant laws (COGEP, the Children's Code, and constitutional principles) and offers an explanation of the relevant facts (custody, visitation rights, and child support). Although concise, the logic is understandable and allows us to grasp why divorce by mutual consent is permitted in order to safeguard the best interests of the child. Since there are no errors or inconsistencies that compromise due process, the judgment should not be overturned or modified. This contribution makes a practical contribution by demonstrating how to assess whether a decision is adequately and precisely reasoned, using simple language and objective criteria. This improves professional training and the ability to critically interpret judgments.