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

Abstract

Abstract: This thesis analyzes the reasoning provided in judgments issued by trial-level judges in Ecuador, highlighting its fundamental role in upholding due process and protecting fundamental rights. In this regard, the research emphasizes that a reasoned judgment must not only cite legal provisions but also provide a reasonable justification for the decision, aligning the facts and evidence with the legal framework. Furthermore, the study examines a case of divorce by mutual consent involving dependent children, evaluating whether the minors' rights regarding custody, visitation schedules, and child support were respected. It also identifies the standards for sufficient and correct reasoning, as well as defects such as the mere appearance of reasoning, incoherence, irrelevance, and inconsistency. Additionally, the legal consequences of flawed reasoning are examined, and mechanisms for rectifying defective judgments are detailed. Finally, the study proposes strengthening training for judges and notaries to ensure legitimate, understandable judicial decisions that contribute to legal certainty and public trust in the justice system.