Quevedo & Ponce - Noticias Legales
Creation of Judicial Units Specialized in Constitutional Matters
- February 5th, 2025
- Quevedo & Ponce
On April 21, 2024, a national referendum took place, where the question outlined in ballot box “C,” which was approved, stated: “Do you agree with the establishment of specialized judicial bodies in constitutional matters at both first and second instance levels for the adjudication of corresponding jurisdictional guarantees, amending the Constitution and reforming the Organic Law of Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control, according to Annex 2?” In response, the Council of the Judiciary, exercising its administrative powers, ordered the creation of these units and chambers through Plenary Resolution No. 006-2025.
What does the creation of these new judicial units entail?
These units will have jurisdiction over cases involving constitutional guarantees, except for the Extraordinary Action of Protection and the Action For Non-Compliance, which will continue to be adjudicated by the Constitutional Court. Hence, the new units will handle and resolve matters regarding Habeas Corpus, Habeas Data, Access to Public Information, Action Of Non-Compliance, and Action of Protection, provided that the respective rights violations have occurred or have effects in the jurisdiction of each Unit or Chamber.
Where will the specialized units in constitutional matters be located?
The resolution outlines the territorial distribution as follows:
Specialized Judicial Units (First Instance):
- Located in Quito, Pichincha Province.
- Located in Machala, El Oro Province.
- Located in Babahoyo, Los Ríos Province.
- Located in Portoviejo, Manabí Province.
- Located in Puerto Baquerizo Moreno, Galápagos Province.
Specialized District Judicial Units (First Instance):
- Located in Cuenca, Azuay Province (Competent for Azuay, Cañar, and Morona Santiago Provinces).
- Located in Ambato, Tungurahua Province (Competent for Tungurahua, Bolívar, Chimborazo, Cotopaxi, and Pastaza Provinces).
- Located in Guayaquil, Guayas Province (Competent for Guayas and Santa Elena Provinces).
- Located in Ibarra, Imbabura Province (Competent for Imbabura and Carchi Provinces).
- Located in Loja, Loja Province (Competent for Loja and Zamora Chinchipe Provinces).
- Located in Francisco de Orellana, Orellana Province (Competent for Orellana, Napo, and Sucumbíos Provinces).
- Located in Santo Domingo, Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas Province (Competent for Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas and Esmeraldas Provinces).
Specialized District Chambers (Second Instance):
- Of the Provincial Court of Justice of Azuay, with jurisdiction over Azuay, Cañar, El Oro, Loja, Morona Santiago, and Zamora Chinchipe Provinces.
- Of the Provincial Court of Justice of Tungurahua, with jurisdiction over Tungurahua, Bolívar, Chimborazo, Cotopaxi, and Pastaza Provinces.
- Of the Provincial Court of Justice of Guayas, with jurisdiction over Guayas, Galápagos, Los Ríos, and Santa Elena Provinces.
- Of the Provincial Court of Justice of Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas, with jurisdiction over Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas, Esmeraldas, and Manabí Provinces.
- Of the Provincial Court of Justice of Pichincha, with jurisdiction over Pichincha, Carchi, Imbabura, Napo, Orellana, and Sucumbíos Provinces.
For matters involving personal jurisdiction, the National Court of Justice could act as the second instance, or otherwise, the President of this Court would act in such cases as dictated by law.
At Quevedo & Ponce, we recognize the profound importance of protecting fundamental rights at all times and advise our clients accordingly. Contact us to learn more about our legal services and our practice in constitutional law.
Más Artículos
¡Evita multas de 2 a 20 salarios básicos! – Plan de igualdad laboral para compañías
El Plan de Igualdad, debe registrarse antes del 31 de julio de 2025 ante el Ministerio del Trabajo, o se impondrán multas de 2 a 20 salarios básicos a las compañías e instituciones públicas que no cumplan con la ley. Este Plan garantiza el mismo trato y oportunidades entre mujeres y hombres en el ámbito laboral, promoviendo la inclusión y buscando eliminar la discriminación.
“Bimbo” Brand Rejected in Switzerland: The Importance of Cultural Perceptions in Trademark Registration
In the world of intellectual property, trademark protection involves not only legal aspects but also the social impact of the terms used. A recent case in Switzerland highlights how a trademark can be rejected if its name has immoral or insensitive connotations towards specific social groups.
Marca “BIMBO” Rechazada en Suiza: La Importancia de las Percepciones Culturales en el Registro de Marcas
El impacto social de los términos en las marcas va más allá de lo legal. Un ejemplo reciente es el rechazo de la marca “BIMBO QSR” en Suiza, donde “Bimbo” se considera ofensivo en alemán. Este caso subraya la necesidad de evaluar las sensibilidades culturales al registrar una marca, especialmente para empresas con proyección internacional.
Administrative Tribunal of Quito Protects the Rights of a Designation Of Origin Registered in the European Union and WIPO
Quevedo & Ponce successfully acted on behalf of the Consorzio Produttori e Tutela della DOP FONTINA in response to a lawsuit filed by an Ecuadorian company, which primarily argued that FONTINA was not registered in Ecuador. However, the Administrative Litigation Tribunal located in the Metropolitan District of Quito upheld the challenged administrative act, citing the risk of consumer confusion and applying Decision 486 of the Andean Community, emphasizing the importance of protecting designations of origin, even without formal registration in Ecuador.
Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo de Quito Protege los Derechos de una Denominación de Origen registrada en la Unión Europea y la OMPI
Quevedo & Ponce actuó exitosamente en representación del Consorzio Produttori e Tutela della DOP FONTINA, ante una demanda presentada por una compañía ecuatoriana, en que se alegó principalmente que FONTINA no estaba registrada en Ecuador. Sin embargo, el Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo con Sede en el Distrito Metropolitano de Quito, ratificó el acto administrativo impugnado, citando el riesgo de confusión para el consumidor y aplicando la Decisión 486 de la Comunidad Andina, destacando la importancia de proteger las denominaciones de origen, incluso sin un registro formal en Ecuador.