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

Abstract

Abstract: This research project examines the constitutional guarantee regarding the requirement for judicial reasoning in Ecuador, analyzing whether first-instance judgments comply with current guidelines on factual and legal sufficiency. Adopting a qualitative approach, the study employed the analytical method of "Judgment Reasoning Analysis" and the "EL SER" methodological strategy to evaluate the fault-based divorce judgment in case No. 17205-2017-00881, issued in the Rumiñahui canton. The results obtained via technical questionnaires based on the Constitutional Court s landmark ruling No. 1158-17-EP/21 demonstrated that the judgment possesses a complete and correct argumentative structure, free from defects such as the absence, insufficiency, or mere appearance of reasoning. However, the case analysis reveals a marked tension between the Ecuadorian substantive civil law regime characterized as anachronistic and punitive and constitutional principles regarding human dignity and the free development of personality. The study concludes that the judicial ruling is valid and legitimate, and recommends promoting legislative reforms to introduce no-fault or unilateral divorce, thereby aligning the legal framework with social reality.