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

Abstract

Abstract: This research analyzes the constitutional guarantee regarding the reasoning of first-instance judgments in Ecuador, focusing on Case No. 17955-2014-XXXX, which concerned the determination of child support. The primary objective was to evaluate whether the judicial reasoning effectively met the standards of sufficiency and correctness established by the Constitutional Court. To conduct this study, an analytical methodology was adopted, utilizing the schematization technique proposed by Atienza; this was complemented by the use of questionnaires designed to identify potential flaws in the reasoning of the judgments. The results indicate that the ruling contains valid reasoning, as the judge successfully aligned the settlement agreement with the applicable legal regulations. It is concluded that the magistrate prioritized the Best Interests of the Child, resulting in a decision that is coherent and clear, thereby guaranteeing effective judicial protection. Finally, the study highlights that adequate reasoning not only prevents arbitrariness but also strengthens legal certainty and public trust in the administration of justice, serving as an indispensable pillar of due process within the Ecuadorian legal system.