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

Abstract

Abstract: This research analyzes the standard for normative and factual reasoning in a first-instance labor court judgment issued in Ecuador, with the objective of determining whether the selected judicial decision meets the constitutional and procedural requirements for sufficient and correct reasoning. Employing a qualitative methodological approach based on doctrinal, normative, and jurisprudential analysis, the study examines each argumentative component of the ruling: background, assessment of evidence, identification of legal issues, *ratio decidendi*, and the operative part of the judgment. The findings demonstrate that the judgment fully satisfies the reasoning standards mandated by Article 76, numeral 7, letter l) of the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador and the Organic General Code of Procedure. The research confirms that the quality of justice depends both on the argumentative rigor of the presiding judge and the procedural coherence of the parties, and it offers a replicable methodological model for the evaluation of first-instance judgments.