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

Abstract

Abstract:This research analyzes judicial reasoning in first-instance judgments in Ecuador, viewing it as a fundamental guarantee within the constitutional state of rights and justice. Adopting a legal perspective, the study examines the reasoning structure employed by first-instance judges to determine whether their judgments meet the requirements for sufficient and correct reasoning established by the legal system. A judgment concerning a case of extraordinary acquisitive prescription of ownership serves as the case study, selected to analyze judicial reasoning in decisions issued by trial-level judges. A key aspect of this research lies in examining technical criteria that facilitate the assessment of rationality in judicial decisions, thereby reinforcing due process guarantees and the right to a defense. The study made it possible to evaluate whether the selected judgment complies with the standards of sufficient and correct reasoning established by the Constitution, the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador, and legal doctrine, offering insights for analyzing decisions at the trial level.