Theses and Case Law/ Litigation / byDaniel Majewski del Castillo.
On #ThesisFriday | On July 10, 2026, the Semanario Judicial published 41 rulings: 13 case law decisions and 28 isolated legal opinions.
We’ve selected the most relevant ones for you, which were issued by the Collegiate Circuit Courts:
Abstracts
Digital registration number: 2032403 / Thesis: (Region IV) 2o.2 A (12a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The court hearing an amparo action filed by a person with a disability must order the presentation of expert evidence necessary to determine the type and degree of the person’s disability.
Disability must be understood from a human rights perspective, ensuring that people with disabilities can exercise their legal capacity and access justice on an equal footing. When a person requires support to effectively exercise their rights, such support must be provided in a manner that respects their will, preferences, and autonomy, without relying on stereotypes or prejudices. Therefore, once a disability has been verified, the authorities must make the necessary procedural accommodations to ensure the person’s full and effective participation.
Digital registration number: 2032407 / Thesis: I.16o.C.5 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Any clause in a demand deposit account agreement in which the bank reserves the right to unilaterally modify, at any time, the interest rates initially agreed upon as fixed is null and void.
This is so because only by providing the account holder with all the information regarding the circumstances under which unilateral changes to interest rates may occur is the account holder empowered to determine whether to enter into the contract or opt for an alternative that might offer greater benefits. For this reason, depriving users of financial services of this possibility directly violates their human rights to property and to the protection of consumer interests.
Digital registration number: 2032408 / Thesis: VII.1o.C.31 C (12a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Commercial proceedings are appropriate when disputes regarding compliance with a collaboration agreement are being resolved and one of the parties is acting with the intent to engage in commercial speculation.
When, in a contract, one of the parties performs an act for the purpose of obtaining an economic benefit, that act is considered a commercial act for that party, and this is sufficient for any dispute arising from the contract to be resolved in accordance with commercial law, even if the act is of a civil nature for the other party. What matters is the economic purpose that motivated at least one of the contracting parties to enter into the contract.
Digital Registration Number: 2032409 / Thesis: VI.3o.A.43 A (12a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The enforceability of a tax claim depends on whether it has been paid or properly secured within the applicable statutory period, regardless of whether it is being contested.
This enforceability does not depend on whether the decision establishing the debt is final, since the tax authority is empowered to demand payment; to do so, it suffices that there be a decision establishing a tax liability that has been duly notified to the individual and that has not been paid or duly secured within the statutory time limit. Furthermore, the mere filing of a lawsuit challenging the debt is not sufficient to suspend its enforcement; rather, the debt must also have been secured. If this is not the case, the debt remains an enforceable tax debt that may be collected by the authority through administrative enforcement proceedings. This is true regardless of whether, should a future challenge be upheld, the amount is refunded to the individual through the appropriate procedure.
Digital registration number: 2032412 / Thesis: I.16o.C.6 C (12a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The dismissal of a claim is invalid when it is based on the assessment of formal requirements or additional conditions that were not specified in the notice of claim.
The purpose of this precautionary measure is to ensure that the complaint contains the minimum elements required for it to be processed; therefore, it is sufficient to clarify the necessary aspects without having to file a new complaint. If the statement of claim clearly identifies the benefits, their amounts, the period covered by the claim, and the corresponding evidence, the precautionary measure should be deemed to have been met, since imposing additional requirements constitutes excessive formalism that violates the right of access to justice.
Digital registration number: 2032417 / Thesis: I.10o.C.9 C (12a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
When a claim is filed to declare bank transfers null and void and the facts are deemed to be implausible, the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff.
This is because the plaintiff’s mere assertions that she was not the one who gave consent to make the disputed transfers are insufficient if they are not supported by the evidence presented and examined during the trial. This is because there is no legal provision that requires the defendant bank to reconstruct the facts in order to establish the truth.
Digital registration: 2032426 and 2032427 7 Theses: I.10o.C.14 C (12a.) and I.10o.C.15 C (12a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
When assessing compliance with a contract for the provision of professional services, the adjudicating official must verify that the terms of the agreement do not violate the prohibition against the exploitation of one person by another.
The primary rationale for this provision is the vulnerable and disadvantaged position of the person contracting professional services; given their lack of technical knowledge and their need for advice or representation in court, or to achieve a legal objective, they may enter into contracts that could be disproportionate to their financial means.
Digital registration number: 2032428 / Thesis: I.10o.C.16 C (12a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The fact that the main dispute is being heard before a foreign court does not give rise to a request for preliminary injunctions as a preliminary matter before a Mexican judge.
In accordance with these rules, jurisdiction over preliminary injunctions requested after the commencement of the trial lies with the judge hearing the main case, even if that case is being heard abroad; otherwise, this would entail a failure to observe the rules of jurisdiction and the principle of concentration, and would create a scenario not provided for by law, which would undermine the coherence of the legal system governing preliminary injunctions.
Post prepared byDaniel Majewski del Castillo.
