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

Abstract

Abstract:This study analyzes the reasoning provided in a judgment issued by a court of first instance in Ecuador specifically Judgment No. 05202-2019-XXXXX, issued by the Judicial Unit for Family, Women, Children, and Adolescents in the Latacunga Canton, Cotopaxi Province with the aim of determining whether the competent authority met the standards of argumentation required by due process. To this end, an analytical methodology was employed to break down the judgment into its key components: the facts, the legal issue, the arguments, and the ruling. Specific tools were used, such as the standard for sufficiency of reasoning and a checklist for proper reasoning. The results show that the analyzed judgment meets the minimum requirements for reasoning, as it contains the factual and legal grounds necessary to understand the decision reached. However, the reasoning lacks qualitative strength a deficiency particularly evident when determining the amount of child support, as there is no exhaustive analysis of the parties' economic situations or the applicable legal rules. In conclusion, although the judgment is valid, its reasoning could be improved and corrected; this highlights the importance of judges raising their standards of reasoning to provide citizens with far more transparent and fair rulings.