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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of this scientific article is to conduct a critical analysis of the quality of argumentation in Ecuadorian court rulings. To this end, we examine a civil judgment issued at first instance which recognizes the extraordinary acquisitive prescription of ownership in order to determine whether it meets the standards for sufficient and correct reasoning required by the Constitutional Court and modern procedural doctrine. From a methodological standpoint, the analysis of the ruling is complemented by assessment matrices evaluating logical, factual, and normative argumentation. The study integrates the Civil Code, the COGEP (General Organic Code of Processes), and municipal administrative law. It also employs composite evidence to properly demonstrate possession. The work aims to serve as a useful methodological and analytical guide for justice officials and legal practitioners, thereby ensuring rigorous argumentation, preventing nullity due to flawed reasoning, and guaranteeing legal certainty, the right to a defense, and effective judicial protection for citizens.