The application of the iura novit curia principle in ecuadorian constitutional jurisprudence

Abstract

The iura novit curia principle recognizes the authority of the judge to identify and apply the relevant law, even when the parties have not invoked it or have formulated it incorrectly, making it particularly relevant within constitutional justice. The objective of the study was to analyze the application of this principle in Ecuadorian constitutional jurisprudence by identifying its legal foundations, interpretative criteria, forms of application, and main limitations. The research was conducted using a qualitative approach, with a legal-documentary design and a descriptive-analytical scope, based on the analysis of national legislation, international instruments, specialized literature, and ten judgments issued by the Constitutional Court of Ecuador. The results showed that the principle was mainly used to identify rights not expressly invoked, redirect constitutional claims, and adjust legal classifications according to the facts examined. Likewise, it was determined that its application must remain consistent with procedural congruence, the right to defense, judicial reasoning, due process, and the dispositive principle. It is concluded that iura novit curia constitutes a relevant tool for ensuring the effective application of law; however, its legitimacy depends on a reasoned, coherent, and limited exercise within procedural guarantees, requiring greater jurisprudential precision to strengthen legal certainty and the predictability of judicial decisions.