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

Abstract

Abstract: This study analyzed the legal reasoning in first-instance rulings in Ecuador, taking Case No. 09319-2022-00768 from the Naranjal canton which concerned a claim for boundary demarcation as a reference point. The primary objective of the research was to assess whether the ruling met constitutional standards regarding the requirement to provide reasons for a decision and the right to effective judicial protection; to this end, an analytical approach and the "EL SER" technique were applied, breaking down judicial arguments through sufficiency questionnaires. The results show that the judge dismissed the claim due to a substantial evidentiary deficiency, as the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the exact location of their current boundaries or the existence of duly defined adjoining properties, given that the original property had undergone multiple extrajudicial subdivisions. The judgment determined that the property observed during the judicial inspection did not match the dimensions or boundaries described in the claim. This case demonstrates that, even when formal due process is guaranteed, a lack of precision.