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

Abstract

Abstract: This research analyzes the guarantee of reasoned decisions within the ordinary procedure for adverse possession, taking as a case study Judgment No. 17233-2019-02230. It examines the doctrinal, normative, and jurisprudential foundations that support the duty to provide reasons, understanding that a duly argued judgment, by aligning the facts with the law, constitutes an essential procedural guarantee for effective judicial protection, transparency, and citizen oversight. Through a qualitative and documentary methodology, based on the analysis of specialized legal sources, current regulations, and relevant jurisprudence, the compliance with the standards of reasoned decisions in the studied ruling has been critically evaluated. The results reveal strengths and weaknesses in judicial argumentation, allowing for the proposal of criteria aimed at improving the quality of rulings, with a view to guaranteeing a fairer and more reliable judicial system. The research concludes that adequate reasoning not only strengthens the constitutional state of law and justice, but also promotes the legitimacy and efficiency of jurisdictional decisions.