Theses and Case Law/ Litigation / by Daniel Majewski del Castillo, Zusel Soto Vilchis, andKarla Mishelli Tapia Santos .
In this #ThesisFriday | June 13, 2025, the Judicial Weekly published 41 new rulings: 24 case law decisions and 17 isolated rulings.
We have selected the most relevant ones for you, which were issued by the Chambers of the SCJN, Collegiate Courts, and Regional Plenary Sessions:
Abstracts
Digital registration: 2030529 / Thesis: P./J. 3/2025 (11th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
Local health authorities, in accordance with their respective jurisdictions, are required to implement, promote, and organize health services to ensure the right to voluntary termination of pregnancy.
With regard to the right to health recognized by Article 4 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States and various constitutional challenges, several criteria have been established that give substance to this right in relation to the right to choose of women and people capable of pregnancy. Notably, for them to effectively exercise their right to voluntarily terminate a pregnancy, it is essential that safe, available, accessible, acceptable, affordable, respectful, and high-quality medical services exist to enable them to do so. Based on these rights and the interpretation provided in those cases, local health authorities must implement, promote, and organize health services to ensure access to elective or voluntary abortion.
Digital registration: 2030517 / Thesis: P./J. 2/2025 (11th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
Advisory opinions issued by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights are not legally binding on Mexican judges, but they have legal significance and may be cited in judicial decisions provided they are more favorable to the parties.
Although advisory opinions are not binding on Mexican judges, they do have legal significance and considerable interpretive authority because they influence how rights and obligations under international law are understood. In this regard, judges may take them into account when issuing various types of judicial decisions. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this does not prevent the interpretations contained in advisory opinions from being incorporated into national law in a binding manner through two channels: 1) the international channel: if the Inter-American Court of Human Rights uses them in its contentious cases, and 2) the national channel: when the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation incorporates them as part of its “ratio decidendi” in its binding precedents.
Digital registration number: 2030551 / Thesis: P./J. 4/2025 (11th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
Companies in which the government holds a majority stake and that are incorporated as corporations cannot be considered public entities for the purpose of being exempt from providing the guarantees required for the suspension of the contested act.
This is because a broad or vague interpretation that would allow any public legal entity to be exempt from providing a guarantee cannot be accepted, since not all legal entities can demonstrate the same financial strength and operational capacity to meet their obligations. In particular, it is not acceptable for companies with majority state ownership incorporated as corporations to be considered public legal entities for the purpose of being exempt from providing a guarantee, since they share neither the assured and unlimited solvency that characterizes the State nor the ability to dispose of their assets with complete freedom and immediacy.
Digital registration: 2030554 / Thesis: P./J. 1/2025 (11th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
Jurisdiction of Collegiate Courts in Amparo Proceedings Concerning the Public Registry of Property.
The jurisdiction of the Circuit Collegiate Courts to hear a case is determined primarily by the nature of the challenged act and the responsible authorities, which ensures greater specialization and efficiency in the administration of justice. In amparo actions against acts of the Public Registry of Property or equivalent bodies, this rule applies even if the act stems from a trial or proceeding in another matter, provided that it is challenged independently. Exceptionally, if the resolution of the amparo requires an analysis of defects in the original proceeding, the nature of that proceeding will also be considered in determining jurisdiction. Thus, although the guiding principles are the challenged act and the responsible authority, in certain cases its connection to the trial or proceeding that gave rise to it may be assessed.
Digital registration: 2030547 / Thesis: 2nd / Vol. 31 / 2025 (11th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
Temporarily restricting the use of digital signatures for electronic invoices is an illegal act of harassment.
The temporary restriction on the use of digital invoices (CFDI) constitutes an act of administrative inconvenience (non-final), as it is provisional and allows taxpayers to correct irregularities or challenge it through legal channels. Since it is a temporary measure, it does not require a prior hearing (Article 14 of the Constitution), as it does not permanently affect rights.
Digital registration: 2030521 / Thesis: 2nd/J. 24/2025 (11th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
District Courts have jurisdiction over appeals challenging changes made by Conciliation Boards.
Article 37 of the Amparo Act provides that territorial jurisdiction in indirect amparo proceedings is determined as follows: (a) the judge of the place where the act is being carried out or will be carried out; (b) if the act affects multiple districts or is of a continuing nature (as in the case of administrative agreements restructuring Labor Boards), jurisdiction lies with the judge where the complaint is filed; and (c) if it does not require physical enforcement, jurisdiction lies with the judge of the place of filing. For the challenged administrative agreements, as they are acts of progressive application across several districts, the competent District Court is the one that first heard the complaint, in accordance with rule (b).
Digital registration: 2030541 / Thesis: 1st/J. 56/2025 (11th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
Personal loans granted by decentralized public agencies to their employees, retirees, or beneficiaries are not of a commercial nature.
The fact that personal loans granted by a decentralized public agency are secured by a negotiable instrument, such as a promissory note, does not necessarily imply that the underlying claim constitutes a commercial transaction and that, therefore, payment must be sought through commercial proceedings. When addressing the distinction between a bill of exchange action and a causal action arising from negotiable instruments, it is essential to identify the underlying transaction giving rise to the issuance of the negotiable instrument and, based on this, to determine the nature of the causal action and the appropriate legal forum in which it should be brought.
Digital registration number: 2030546 / Thesis: 2nd semester, 2025 (11th)
SCJN Isolated Opinion
It is up to the individual to prove the non-pecuniary damage caused in a proceeding for state liability, unless the harm suffered is evident.
In cases where the judge can infer, based on the proven facts, that the individual has clearly suffered harm to their non-pecuniary or emotional well-being, it is unnecessary to require such evidence, as certain types of emotional distress may be presumed given the difficulty in proving them. That is, it is sufficient that the harmful event and the status of the affected party be demonstrated for the presumption to apply and for the moral damage to be deemed proven, without prejudice to the fact that, in order to quantify the amount of compensation, the court may order the presentation of the necessary evidence to justify and determine the extent to which the State’s unlawful conduct affected the person’s intangible integrity (emotions, feelings, and spirituality).
Digital registration number: 2030519 / Thesis: XVIII.1o.P.A.1 K (11th)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The competent authority that receives a petition for direct amparo must limit its actions to the procedure set forth in Article 178 of the Amparo Law and refrain from issuing any other ruling that falls within the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court of Appeals responsible for hearing the case.
The competent authority must limit itself to fulfilling the obligations imposed by Article 178 of the relevant law, which provides that, within five days from the day following the filing of the complaint, it shall only: I. Certify at the bottom of the complaint the date on which the complainant was notified of the contested decision, the date of the complaint’s filing, and the non-business days that elapsed between those two dates; II. Serve notice on the interested third party at the last address designated by that party for service of process in the original proceedings or at the address indicated by the petitioner; and III. Submit the report with justification accompanying the petition for amparo.
Digital registration number: 2030525 / Thesis: I.5o.C.191 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Judges may, on their own initiative, declare unfair terms in the standard-form contract at issue to be void.
Although procedural rules exist in our country that allow individuals to represent themselves in litigation, the reality is that there is a significant risk that consumers will fail to raise the issue of the unfair nature of a clause used against them; therefore, effective consumer protection can only be achieved if judges are empowered to identify unfair terms on their own initiative. Furthermore, the judge’s ex officio intervention can serve as a deterrent that helps put an end to the use of unfair terms in contracts entered into by a supplier with consumers, since it will create the understanding that, even if such clauses are imposed and the defendant does not raise the issue in its answer, they must be examined by the courts—as part of their obligations regarding consumer protection.
Digital registration number: 2030534 / Thesis: I.5o.C.195 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Irregular conduct by a judicial officer that results in the nullification of proceedings arising from a motion to declare notices null and void within the judgment enforcement proceedings does not interrupt the statute of limitations or affect the substantive rights of the party seeking enforcement.
The statute of limitations is a penalty imposed on a person who, despite having the substantive right (by virtue of being part of the legal sphere of the prevailing party in a lawsuit) to bring an action, fails to do so within the time limit prescribed by law. Therefore, the right to enforce a judgment cannot be contingent upon the actions of judicial officials (such as an irregularity in service of process), since the former is a substantive right that transcends procedural actions. To think otherwise would lead to the absurdity that those entitled to enforcement could lose their rights recognized in an enforceable judgment solely due to the negligent conduct of an authority.
Digital registration number: 2030552 / Thesis: I.5o.C.12 K (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The fact that a person is a senior citizen does not exempt them from providing security to ensure the suspension in a direct amparo proceeding.
Although the Constitution requires enhanced protection for older adults (equal access to justice and substantive balance in legal relationships), this does not automatically exempt them from meeting the procedural requirements for suspension in direct amparo proceedings, as these requirements are intended to ensure the effectiveness of the protected right and prevent harm to third parties. Only when there are indications of specific vulnerability (e.g., proven economic or physical incapacity) could these procedural requirements be relaxed. In principle, the rules on suspension apply equally to everyone, without distinction based on age, unless an exceptional situation is demonstrated that justifies adaptations.
Digital record: 2030516 / Thesis: PR.A.C.CN. J/74 A (11th)
Case Law: Regional Circuit Court Plenary Sessions
The representative of the competent authority, in an indirect appeal, may not file a motion for review or a motion for reconsideration.
The Second Chamber of the SCJN ruled, after analyzing Article 9 of the Amparo Law, that the responsible authorities may only be represented in amparo proceedings by public servants from their own legal units (not by external attorneys), since the law seeks to ensure their specialized defense through their own institutional mechanisms. The exception applies only to private individuals (who may act on their own behalf, through a legal representative, or through an attorney). To reinforce this representation, the provision allows authorities to designate delegates via official letter to perform key procedural acts (hearings, appeals, pleadings), but always within their governmental structure.
Digital registration number: 2030527 / Thesis: PR.P.T.CS. J/10 K (11th)
Case Law: Regional Circuit Court Plenary Sessions
This error must be corrected when a direct amparo petition is filed by a third party, but the content of the petition indicates that it is being filed in the petitioner’s own right.
Both the case law P./J. 24/96 of the Plenary Session of the SCJN and Article 76 of the Amparo Law establish that the correction of purely formal errors in the drafting of the petition or in the identification of the petitioner must be permitted, since the guiding principle is to interpret amparo petitions in a flexible and non-restrictive manner, prioritizing substance (the effective protection of rights) over form. This approach ensures that the complainant’s true intent is addressed and the legal dispute raised is resolved, in accordance with the right of access to justice (Article 17 of the Constitution).
Digital registration number: 2030543 / Thesis: PR.P.T.CS. J/9 K (11th ed.)
Case Law: Regional Circuit Court Plenary Sessions
The appeal challenging the dismissal of the motion due to noncompliance with the suspension remains valid even if the constitutional protection ruling becomes final.
Case Law P./J. 21/2016 (10a.) of the Plenary Session of the SCJN establishes that an appeal against a ruling resolving an incidental proceeding for breach of a stay of execution (whether due to excess or deficiency) does not lose its purpose even if the amparo judgment has become final. This is because its purpose is to examine the legality of the challenged ruling, verifying whether the stay was properly complied with and whether the authority was able to correct its errors, which could be relevant to potential complaints regarding the crime of failure to comply with a stay (Article 262, Section III, Amparo Law). The same logic applies when the appeal is directed against an order dismissing the motion, since in both cases the objective is to review the legality of the decision that brought the motion to a close, regardless of the final outcome of the amparo proceeding.
This publication was prepared by Daniel Majewski del Castillo, Zusel Soto Vilchis, andKarla Mishelli Tapia Santos.
