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

Abstract

Abstract: This thesis project examines the reasoning behind judgments issued by trial court judges in Ecuador, focusing on a divorce case based on abandonment. The research seeks to determine whether judicial decisions meet constitutional requirements for completeness and logical coherence, aiming to address issues such as a lack of legal basis, insufficient reasoning, or merely superficial justification. This study employs a descriptive-analytical methodology to deconstruct the factual and legal structure of the judgment under analysis, engaging with argumentation theory and the body of case law established by the Constitutional Court. Furthermore, the article contributes by validating a discursive methodology designed to ensure compliance with due process requirements, demonstrating how the rational justification of a judgment reinforces the democratic legitimacy of judicial bodies. The study concludes that the ruling in question meets standards of legal validity by establishing a rational, explicit link between the documentary or testimonial evidence and the applicable substantive law, thereby directly contributing to the predictability and certainty of the local justice system.