Theses and Case Law/ Litigation / byDaniel Majewski del Castillo,Guadalupe Villa Figueroa, andFrida Isabel Velázquez Vargas.
On #ThesisFriday | June 12, 2026, the Judicial Weekly published 34 rulings: 17 case law decisions and 17 isolated rulings.
We have selected the most relevant ones for you, which were issued by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, Regional Circuit Plenary Sessions, and the Collegiate Circuit Courts:
Abstracts
Digital registration: 2032260 / Thesis: P./J. 132/2026 (12th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
The regulatory framework governing administrative sanction proceedings before CONDUSEF does not violate the principle of legal certainty.
The regulatory framework established by the Law on Transparency and Regulation of Financial Services and on Registrations with the National Commission for the Protection and Defense of Financial Services Users (CONDUSEF), by setting forth the timeframe within which said Commission must issue and notify the decision regarding the administrative sanctioning proceeding, does not violate the principle of legal certainty. This is because the principle applies only to the Commission’s exercise of its sanctioning powers for noncompliance with the Provisions on Registrations with CONDUSEF.
Digital registration number: 2032258 / Thesis: P./J. 127/2026 (12th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
Social protest is recognized as a fundamental human right in its own right, with its own distinct identity.
Peaceful social protest stems from the interdependent set of political freedoms and rights that make public deliberation, accountability, and the effective exercise of the vote possible; it constitutes one of the mechanisms through which citizens keep channels of oversight over those in power open, preserve public deliberation, and hold their representatives accountable beyond electoral processes. Indeed, it emerges as a necessary consequence of the set of constitutional principles and provisions.
Digital registration number: 2032263 / Thesis: PR.A.C.CN. J/5 C (12th)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
The indirect appeal filed against the ruling confirming the determination that the requirement for necessary joinder of defendants has not been met is inadmissible, as it does not constitute an act that cannot be remedied.
Since the ruling confirming the determination that the necessary joinder of defendants is not updated constitutes a purely procedural or procedural act, the effect of which is to continue the trial with the substantive composition established up to that point, an indirect amparo is inadmissible, as this act is not considered irreparable since it does not affect substantive rights; and, as it is a procedural violation, it may be asserted within the direct amparo.
Digital registration: 2032265 / Thesis: PR.A.C.CN. J/42 A (12th)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
If a taxpayer does not open the electronic notification sent to their Tax Mailbox, there is no legal requirement for the notification record to include the time at which the electronic notice was sent.
If the taxpayer does not open the electronic notice sent to their tax mailbox within the 3-day period granted under applicable law, the notice shall be deemed to have been served automatically on the fourth day; therefore, it is not necessary for the relevant record to include the time of dispatch, as this does not create legal uncertainty for the recipient of the document to be served, since the time limits are calculated in full days and not moment by moment.
Digital registration: 2032275 / Thesis: PR.P.T.CN. J/2 K (12th ed.)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
The deadline for filing a complaint against the judge’s failure to rule on the suspension is two days.
This differs from the scenario under consideration, in which there is an objective criterion that makes it possible to determine the exact moment when the time limit for filing the appeal begins to run, namely, the day following the date on which the procedural act regarding the suspension took effect but no decision was rendered.
Digital registration: 2032245 and 2032246 / Thesis: I.10o.C.6 C (12th ed.) and I.10o.C.7 C (12th ed.)
Individual Decisions of Circuit Courts of Appeals
The amount of child support for minors with disabilities must be determined based on actual needs to ensure the minimum conditions for a dignified life for the child support recipient and, above all, to address their state of need.
In the case of minors with disabilities, child support must guarantee their right to lead a fulfilling life under conditions that ensure their dignity, as well as to receive the care, assistance, and services necessary for their individual development and social integration. Consequently, the analysis conducted by judges regarding the right to child support must be carried out from a perspective that prioritizes children and disability, incorporating the specific needs of the minor and the duty to seek the removal of environmental barriers that prevent the effective exercise of their rights.
Digital registration number: 2032255 / Thesis: I.5o.C.1 C (12th)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Claims that are excluded from the estate in bankruptcy proceedings are those incurred after the commencement of the proceedings and the issuance of the bankruptcy order, with the exception of claims arising from employment, tax obligations, and those secured by collateral.
Credits acquired prior to the court’s declaration of bankruptcy cannot be considered claims against the bankruptcy estate, since once the bankruptcy judgment is issued, the company is formally in a state of general default on its obligations; therefore, subsequent claims will be granted only to the extent necessary for the administration and operation of the company. For this reason, it must be concluded that these claims will be treated differently, with the exception of labor claims, tax claims, and those secured by collateral.
Digital registration number: 2032267 / Thesis: I.10o.C.5 K (12th ed.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Taking aging into account in amparo proceedings makes it possible to distinguish between older adults and the very elderly, thereby determining their vulnerability.
In an amparo proceeding, the assessment of vulnerability in older adults requires consideration of their specific circumstances and the aging process they are undergoing; therefore, when a “very elderly” person appears in court and there are indications regarding their very advanced age, it is possible to presume their vulnerability, unless proven otherwise, for the purpose of conducting a more rigorous analysis of the procedural or financial burdens imposed on them, as is the case when setting the amount of a bond in a motion for suspension.
Digital registration number: 2032274 / Thesis: I.5o.C.2 C (12th)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
In an oral commercial enforcement proceeding, testimony will be excluded if the person resides outside the jurisdiction of the court hearing the case and the list of questions has not been presented.
Because the presentation of foreign testimonial evidence in oral commercial enforcement proceedings and oral commercial proceedings is not specifically regulated, it must be conducted in accordance with the rules governing ordinary commercial proceedings. Therefore, when offering such evidence, the party presenting it must submit its questions along with copies for the other parties, who may in turn submit their own cross-examination questions. Failure to do so must result in the evidence being dismissed in accordance with the principles of procedural efficiency and economy, as the evidence cannot be properly presented.
Prepared byDaniel Majewski del Castillo,Guadalupe Villa Figueroa, andFrida Isabel Velázquez Vargas.
