Incompetencia del artículo 231 del COIP frente a las cláusulas arbitrales previstas en los artículos 7 y 8 de la LAM.

Abstract

In the Ecuadorian legal system, contraventions arising from violations of the Organic Law on Consumer Defense fall under the jurisdiction of contraventions judges according to Article 231 of the COIP. However, many complaints are based on contracts containing mediation or arbitration clauses, which creates a normative conflict with the Arbitration and Mediation Law (LAM), recognizing the validity and binding nature of these agreements. The COIP does not provide an exception for contraventions judges to abstain when arbitration clauses exist, generating legal uncertainty and contradictions in judicial practice. This study analyzes this legal gap and proposes a normative solution to ensure legal certainty and due process, harmonizing judicial competence with alternative dispute resolution mechanisms agreed upon by the parties. The research is divided into four chapters covering the regulatory framework, the conflict between laws, international experiences, and conclusions with reform proposals to Article 231 of the COIP.