DIFFERENT SCENARIOS OF IMPROPER DE FACTO UNION DUE TO IMPEDITION OF BOND: LEGAL ANALYSIS OF A COMPLEX SOCIAL REALITY

Abstract

Improper de facto unions represent a complex legal concept that arises when one or both members of a de facto couple maintain a previous, undissolved marital bond, preventing legal recognition of their current relationship. This article analyzes the various scenarios in which this institution manifests itself, from the perspective of impediment to a bond, examining the solutions adopted in different legal systems and the challenges posed by the protection of the rights of the individuals involved, especially those acting in good faith. This study adopts a qualitative approach to legal research, using the comparative method to analyze the different normative and jurisprudential approaches to the problem of improper de facto unions. Documentary analysis of primary sources (legislation, jurisprudence) and secondary sources (specialized doctrine) from several Latin American countries is employed. The research is structured around the analysis of paradigmatic cases identified in Mexican, Brazilian, and Peruvian jurisprudence, contrasting them with the Ecuadorian regime, where these unions lack legal protection. The hermeneutic method is used to interpret normative texts, and critical analysis is used to evaluate the solutions proposed in each legal system. Three main scenarios are identified: the persistence of marriages with community of life (parallel families), the persistence of marriages without community of life, and cases where a previously recognized de facto union exists. The study reveals the need to develop more flexible regulatory frameworks that recognize contemporary social reality and protect the fundamental rights of people in vulnerable situations, considering criteria of good faith and equity.