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

Abstract

Abstract: This research analyzes the reasoning contained in the judgments issued by first-level judges in Ecuador, through a detailed study of case No. 01333202311031 in civil matters. The main objective was to evaluate the sufficiency and correctness of the judicial reasoning, in accordance with current constitutional, doctrinal, and jurisprudential standards. To this end, the analytical method and the reasoning evaluation model proposed by Atienza were applied, complemented by questionnaires on sufficiency and correctness. The results show that the judgment studied presents clear, coherent, relevant, and complete reasoning, complying with the principles established in Article 76, paragraph 7, subparagraph l) of the Constitution and the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court. The judge adequately justified her decision by determining that the check in question was delivered as collateral and not as a simple payment order, which precludes its enforcement through summary proceedings. Furthermore, she correctly applied the provisions of the Organic Monetary and Financial Code and the COGEP, as well as the rational assessment of the evidence. It is concluded that the analyzed ruling constitutes an example of sufficient and correct reasoning, reinforcing judicial transparency and the effective protection of rights.