ANÁLISIS JURÍDICO Y DOCTRINARIO RESPECTO A LA UNIFICACIÓN DE CRITERIO DE JUECES VULNERANDO LA TUTELA JUDICIAL EFECTIVA EN MATERIA TRIBUTARIA
My intention is to clarify the importance of the application of a unified criterion within the administration of Ecuadorian justice, specifically focused on tax courts, safeguarding effective judicial protection and legal security to demonstrate the effectiveness of application of systems of judicia...
Shranjeno v:
| Glavni avtor: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | bachelorThesis |
| Jezik: | spa |
| Izdano: |
2024
|
| Teme: | |
| Online dostop: | https://dspace.unl.edu.ec/jspui/handle/123456789/30253 |
| Oznake: |
Označite
Brez oznak, prvi označite!
|
| Izvleček: | My intention is to clarify the importance of the application of a unified criterion within the administration of Ecuadorian justice, specifically focused on tax courts, safeguarding effective judicial protection and legal security to demonstrate the effectiveness of application of systems of judicial precedents towards cases of future analogues that meet the factual elements necessary for a correct correlation. The methodology used was analytical, descriptive, 30 surveys and 2 interviews. It was directed towards legal professionals specialized in tax matters, in addition, an analysis was made of two sentences issued by the Plenary Session of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador referring to the application of judicial precedent systems. Regarding the field and case investigation, it was established that the multiplicity of judicial criteria reflected in the resolutions of the judges that make up the Ecuadorian judicial system in tax matters have a direct impact on the non-observance of the right to effective judicial protection and legal security; its lack of application affects the legal certainty provided to those administered or taxpayers, incurring non- observance of the principle of tax equality and certainty of reasonableness of the stare principle. Decide It is concluded that non-compliance and lack of application of judicial precedent systems leads to the violation of judicial protection, and would also lead to the administrators of justice making errors of interpretation and motivation, generating insecurity, uncertainty and doubt in the resolution of cases of future analogues. |
|---|