“La declaración compuesta del confesante y su incidencia frente al principio de indivisibilidad de la prueba de confesión judicial, en el juzgado primero de lo Civil del cantón Riobamba, en el período enero – junio 2014.”

The statement made by the confessor and its impact on the principle of indivisibility of the evidence of judicial confession, in the first civil court of the canton Riobamba, in the period January - June 2014." The statement made by the confessor and its impact on the principle of indivisibility of the evidence of judicial confession, in the first civil court of the canton Riobamba, in the period January - June 2014." The object of the judicial confession is to constitute a means of proof, based on the credibility of the declaration of part, because it makes the confessor recognize his actions and produce harmful effects. That is to say, the object is for the confessor to create evidence against him, forcing the Judge to place the confessed fact as truth on the basis of his resolution. It is very common in human nature to lie to obtain an undeserved benefit and this could happen when the confessor lies not to recognize an existing right of his counterpart, in which case the judicial confession would not be effective. Nevertheless, when a judicial confession obtains the recognition of the confessor, it is constituted in a probative means of high range, because contrary to the human nature, no one would lie to injure itself. Under this principle it is concluded that if obtained, judicial confession is the final and most relevant probative means, for these reasons in the legal area has been popularized its effect with phrases such as: "A confession of part, relief of proof." , "The queen of trials" "The mother of all tests", "probatio probatissima, omnium probationum maxima est". Now that, not always the full content of the judicial confession, is applicable as a means of proof, because there may be fragments of the statement, unrelated to what the confessor is asked, it is for this reason that, Need to separate what concerns the declaration of other facts that have nothing to do with the main root cause. Despite what has been explained, there is a justification in law and doctrine, so that judicial practice avoids making such selection. The indivisibility of the test is an absolute rule and it is in this sense how the Judge should value it. In judicial confession, this criterion is intensified, since it is a constant statement in a single body, regardless of the number of questions and answers that it possesses; In that sense, to divide the confession would be equal to denaturalize it. The reason for the present investigation will be to find a mechanism by which it is possible to separate from the declaration, which is not in accordance with the established question, without undermining the principle of indivisibility of the evidence and thus contributing to the activity of civil procedural law, To establish a test and improve the administration of justice. The object of the judicial confession is to constitute a means of proof, based on the credibility of the declaration of part, because it makes the confessor recognize his actions and produce harmful effects. That is to say, the object is for the confessor to create evidence against him, forcing the Judge to place the confessed fact as truth on the basis of his resolution. It is very common in human nature to lie to obtain an undeserved benefit and this could happen when the confessor lies not to recognize an existing right of his counterpart, in which case the judicial confession would not be effective. Nevertheless, when a judicial confession obtains the recognition of the confessor, it is constituted in a probative means of high range, because contrary to the human nature, no one would lie to injure itself. Under this principle it is concluded that if obtained, judicial confession is the final and most relevant probative means, for these reasons in the legal area has been popularized its effect with phrases such as: "A confession of part, relief of proof." , "The queen of trials" "The mother of all tests", "probatio probatissima, omnium probationum maxima est". Now that, not always the full content of the judicial confession, is applicable as a means of proof, because there may be fragments of the statement, unrelated to what the confessor is asked, it is for this reason that, Need to separate what concerns the declaration of other facts that have nothing to do with the main root cause. Despite what has been explained, there is a justification in law and doctrine, so that judicial practice avoids making such selection. The indivisibility of the test is an absolute rule and it is in this sense how the Judge should value it. In judicial confession, this criterion is intensified, since it is a constant statement in a single body, regardless of the number of questions and answers that it possesses; In that sense, to divide the confession would be equal to denaturalize it. The reason for the present investigation will be to find a mechanism by which it is possible to separate from the declaration, which is not in accordance with the established question, without undermining the principle of indivisibility of the evidence and thus contributing to the activity of civil procedural law, To establish a test and improve the administration of justice.

• Hlavní autor: Salazar Hernández, Maritza Carolina (author)
• Médium: bachelorThesis
• Jazyk: spa
• Vydáno: 2016
• On-line přístup: http://dspace.unach.edu.ec/handle/51000/3195