Análisis a la Excepción de la Carga de la Prueba y su Aplicación en el Proceso Sumario de Alimentos en el Ecuador
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2026-03-23
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad de Cuenca. Facultad de Jurisprudencia y Ciencias Políticas y Sociales
Abstract
The research analyzed the issues arising from the interpretation and application of Article 169, paragraph four, of the Organic General Code of Processes (2015), which establishes that, in matters of child support, the burden of proving the obligor’s income lies with the defendant. The study focused specifically on actions for the determination of child support payments. This provision introduces an exception to the general rule of onus probandi, by shifting to the defendant the responsibility of proving his or her financial capacity so that the judge may determine the appropriate amount of support. The main objective was to examine the scope of this exception and to propose a proper interpretation to guide its correct application by judges of the Family, Women, Children and Adolescents Courts, thereby safeguarding the right to maintenance recognized in the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador and in the Code on Children and Adolescents. The research was conducted under a qualitative approach, with a dogmatic-legal and descriptive design, applying analytical and systematic methods through the study of constitutional provisions, legal doctrine, and three practical scenarios: an erroneous interpretation of the rule as a total exemption of the claimant; the defendant’s failure to prove income; and the defendant’s failure to appear. It is concluded that Article 169(4) does not release the claimant from providing evidence, but rather reinforces the defendant’s evidentiary duty. Likewise, the absence of proof should not automatically result in the imposition of the minimum support payment; instead, it requires a reasoned assessment in accordance with the principles of sound judicial discretion and the best interests of the child.The research analyzed the issues arising from the interpretation and application of Article 169, paragraph four, of the Organic General Code of Processes (2015), which establishes that, in matters of child support, the burden of proving the obligor’s income lies with the defendant. The study focused specifically on actions for the determination of child support payments. This provision introduces an exception to the general rule of onus probandi, by shifting to the defendant the responsibility of proving his or her financial capacity so that the judge may determine the appropriate amount of support. The main objective was to examine the scope of this exception and to propose a proper interpretation to guide its correct application by judges of the Family, Women, Children and Adolescents Courts, thereby safeguarding the right to maintenance recognized in the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador and in the Code on Children and Adolescents. The research was conducted under a qualitative approach, with a dogmatic-legal and descriptive design, applying analytical and systematic methods through the study of constitutional provisions, legal doctrine, and three practical scenarios: an erroneous interpretation of the rule as a total exemption of the claimant; the defendant’s failure to prove income; and the defendant’s failure to appear. It is concluded that Article 169(4) does not release the claimant from providing evidence, but rather reinforces the defendant’s evidentiary duty. Likewise, the absence of proof should not automatically result in the imposition of the minimum support payment; instead, it requires a reasoned assessment in accordance with the principles of sound judicial discretion and the best interests of the child.
Resumen
La investigación analizó la problemática derivada de la interpretación y aplicación del artículo 169, inciso cuarto, del Código Orgánico General de Procesos (2015), que establece que, en materia de alimentos, la prueba de los ingresos del obligado recae en el demandado. El estudio se centró específicamente en la acción de fijación de pensión alimenticia. La norma introduce una excepción a la regla general del onus probandi, al trasladar al demandado la carga de acreditar su capacidad económica para que el juzgador determine la pensión correspondiente. El objetivo principal fue analizar el alcance de dicha excepción y proponer una interpretación adecuada que oriente su correcta aplicación por parte de los jueces de familia, mujer, niñez y adolescencia, garantizando así el derecho de alimentos reconocido en la Constitución de la República del Ecuador y en el Código de la Niñez y Adolescencia. La investigación se desarrolló bajo un enfoque cualitativo, con diseño dogmático jurídico y descriptivo, empleando los métodos analítico y sistemático, mediante el estudio de normas constitucionales, doctrina y tres supuestos prácticos: interpretación errónea de la norma como exoneración total del actor; el demandado no prueba sus ingresos; y el demandado no comparece. Se concluye que el artículo 169.4 no libera al actor de aportar prueba, sino que refuerza el deber probatorio del demandado. Asimismo, la falta de prueba no debe implicar la fijación automática de la pensión mínima, sino una valoración motivada conforme a la sana crítica y al principio del interés superior del niño.
Keywords
Derecho Civil, Onus probandi, Sana crítica, Tutela judicial efectiva
Citation
Código de tesis
C; 1129
Código de tesis
Grado Académico
Abogado