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

Abstract

Abstract: In the reasoning analyzed in Judgment No. 17250-2020-00111, issued by the judges of the first level, regarding the protective action filed by Seguros Sucre S.A. against EP Petroecuador, a violation of due process and legal certainty was alleged during a public procurement process. The procedural reasoning emphasizes that due and authentic judicial defense does not guarantee a favorable outcome, but rather access to legally protected methods established by law, with appropriately reasoned resolutions. Therefore, finding no impropriety or lack of protection on the part of Petroecuador, the protective action was declared rejected. This research compiles normative, doctrinal, and jurisprudential arguments that formed part of the process for the judge's subsidiary and extraordinary decision on the protective action claim, highlighting that this conflict was inadmissible because it is entirely administratively valid, only in the case of a real, demonstrable, and unquestionable violation of constitutional norms. To determine that the arithmetic correction developed by the contracting company was established in accordance with SERCOP regulations and there was no correction to the content of the offer nor did it infringe upon constitutional rights. Thus, this analysis provided an analytical consideration on the term of the protective action and the importance of protecting its exceptional form to obtain secure protection of fundamental norms.