Jurisprudencia y Ciencias Sociales

URI permanente para esta comunidadhttp://repositorio.uta.edu.ec/handle/123456789/892

Examinar

Filtros

20261

Ajustes

Autor/a: search.filters.author.Onofre Martinez, Donovan SamuelTema: search.filters.subject.SENTENCIA

Resultados de la búsqueda

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
  • Miniatura
    Item type:Ítem,
    La sentencia dictada por falta o incorrecta contestación a la demanda en procesos ejecutivos de letra de cambio y el derecho al debido proceso
    (Universidad Técnica de Ambato, Facultad de Jurisprudencia y Ciencias Sociales, Carrera de Derecho, 2026-07-09)
    Onofre Martinez, Donovan Samuel
    ;
    Jordan Buenaño, Jeanette Elizabeth
    The Executive Procedure is a type of special procedure that is based on the expeditious collection of an obligation contained in any of the instruments classified as enforceable, such as the case of the bill of Exchange. However, in the Ecuadorian legal system, the overprotection of the plaintiff has transformed this procedure into an excessively privileged means of collection that undermines the fundamental rights of the defendant. There are many ways in which this aspect is externalized, however, its maximum expression is the judgment that is issued when the defendant does not answer the claim or when he does so incorrectly, because it produces two notably harmful legal effects. The first, that the judgment is issued without the need to convene a hearing and the most harmful, that the judgment takes on the character of res judicata immediately it is pronounced, which means that the defendant cannot file any appeal. By virtue of the above, this paper focused on analyzing whether the judgment issued for the lack or incorrect response to the claim in executive proceedings for the collection of bills of exchange violates the right to due process. For this purpose, the research was developed under a theoretical-documentary scheme, with the aim of studying in detail the concepts, foundations and criteria of legal institutions, thus allowing to solve with sufficient legal rigor the problems and questions of the work. Likewise, the research was carried out under a qualitative approach that arrived at three levels: exploratory, descriptive and explanatory. Meanwhile, the research methods used were: systematic, analysis-synthesis, comparative law and constitutional interpretation. On the other hand, techniques such as content analysis and documentary analysis were used to achieve clear and useful results that gave a concrete answer to the research problem. Among the main findings, it was found that the judgment under study violates the right to due process in the guarantee of defense, specifically in the guarantees of being heard under equal conditions and appealing. Finally, it was concluded that it is necessary to amend Article 352 of the COGEP, which is where this judgment is regulated, in order to safeguard the fundamental rights of the defendant and to adapt its regulation to Latin American international standards.