Theses and Case Law/ Litigation / by Daniel Majewski del Castillo and Zusel Soto Vilchis.
On #ThesisFriday | On April 17, 2026, the Judicial Weekly published 23 new rulings: 16 case law decisions and 7 isolated rulings.
We have selected the most relevant ones for you, which were issued by the Circuit Collegiate Courts and the Regional Circuit Plenary Sessions:
Abstracts
Digital registration: 2032033 / Thesis: P./J. 53/2026 (12th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
A conflict of legal opinions is inadmissible when one of the disputing bodies merely based its reasoning on a ruling of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation without issuing its own legal opinion.
When a judge bases his or her decision on a precedent established by the Supreme Court, he or she is not actually offering an independent line of reasoning, but merely applying a binding rule. For this reason, there can be no question of a conflict of precedents, since the law does not provide for such a scenario and, in essence, there are not two distinct positions, but only one: that of the Supreme Court. Furthermore, it would not be valid for a lower court to contradict that precedent, because within the legal system, the Supreme Court’s precedents are binding and take precedence over those of other courts.
Digital registration: 2032036 / Thesis: P./J. 57/2026 (12th)
Case Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
The effects of a judgment declaring noncompliance in a constitutional dispute when it is established that a court has applied a general rule that has been declared invalid.
The Supreme Court may intervene when a government agency enforces a law or regulation that has already been declared invalid. In such cases, it gives the agency 15 days to correct the situation and rescind its action. If the noncompliance is confirmed, the Court may order that the decision be annulled and that a new one be issued without relying on the invalid regulation and in accordance with the Court’s own ruling. Furthermore, it warns that if the authority fails to comply, it may face serious consequences, including removal from office and referral to a judge.
Digital registration number: 2032030 / Thesis: PR.P.T.CN. J/8 P (12th ed.)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
The defendant should be ordered to pay direct compensation as part of the comprehensive redress for the harm caused.
Although the law does not directly mention “direct compensation,” it is understood to exist because the Constitution states that every victim has the right to have the harm they suffered remedied. Therefore, the perpetrator must pay this compensation as part of the reparation, even in cases of non-serious crimes. In addition, there is another form of compensation paid by the State, but only in specific cases. This applies when the perpetrator cannot pay, for example, because they are a fugitive, have died, or cannot be compelled to comply.
Digital registration number: 2032041 / Thesis: PR.P.T.CN. J/1 K (12th)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
For a person to be considered a qualified party in the broad sense of an amparo proceeding, it is not necessary for their professional license to be registered in the PJF’s computerized system.
The law allows a person to authorize a lawyer with either broad or limited powers; to do so, it is sufficient to include in the written document information verifying that the lawyer holds a law degree. It is not necessary for that attorney to be registered in the Judiciary’s internal system, as that registry serves only as an administrative tool to facilitate inquiries. Therefore, the absence of such registration does not invalidate the authorization or limit its effects, since requiring it would impose a condition not provided for by law and could affect the right of access to justice.
Digital record: 2032044 / Thesis: PR.A.C.CS. J/8 K (12th)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
The National Code of Civil and Family Procedure applies on a supplementary basis to amparo proceedings and to any appeals arising therefrom, with immediate effect and without any conditions attached to its application.
This is because, following the aforementioned reform, the current Amparo Law no longer designates the Federal Code of Civil Procedure as supplementary legislation, but rather the National Code of Civil and Family Procedure. Thus, the declaration of entry into force provided for in the second transitional article of the aforementioned national code is designed to ensure the gradual implementation of the code as the primary procedural legislation in ordinary proceedings, not to prevent its use as supplementary legislation as contemplated by a special law regulating the Constitution.
Digital record: 2032024 / Thesis: I.10o.C. J/1 C (12a.)
Case Law of the Circuit Courts of Appeals
State courts have jurisdiction to hear cases in which a direct action is brought against an insurance company when a claim is made under the CFE’s liability insurance.
This is because the direct application of Article 147 in the area of insurance protects strictly private interests and therefore does not constitute a “national dispute” under Article 128. Consequently, federal jurisdiction applies only when the dispute relates to the CFE’s special regime or involves the national interest, not merely because of the CFE’s involvement.
Digital registration number: 2032040 / Thesis: XXIV.1o. J/1 A (12a.)
Case Law of the Circuit Courts of Appeals
It is not necessary to exhaust administrative litigation in the State of Nayarit before filing an indirect amparo action when alleging a violation of the right to petition.
This is because: a) with respect to acts of administrative authorities, Article 61, Section XX, of the Amparo Law establishes, as an exception to the principle of finality, that the act being challenged must lack a legal basis; b) by its very nature, an omission lacks a legal basis; c) the Amparo Law does not distinguish between a positive act and an omission, so it is not permissible for the legal operator to do so; and d) the grounds for dismissal are strictly applicable.
Digital registration number: 2032034 / Thesis: VI.3o.A.15 A (12th)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Res judicata is subject to limitations based on general and specific criteria.
Judicial authorities must take into account that, for res judicata to apply, it must be established that the issue in question has already been addressed in a final judgment resulting from a proceeding in which the right of the minor involved to participate was guaranteed. Consequently, in certain cases, even if a trial has concluded, res judicata cannot be invoked in a different trial if there is a general or specific limitation.
Digital registration number: 2032029 / Thesis: I.6o.C.1 C (12th)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
When a claim for damages is brought against the CFE’s insurer to enforce an insurance contract, it is improper to name the insurer as a necessary co-defendant or third party.
It is not appropriate to join the aforementioned state-owned enterprise as a third party so that the judgment rendered in the original proceeding may affect it, because the possibility or necessity of third-party joinder arises only when it can be inferred from the nature of the legal relationship at issue and the parties’ claims that the judgment to be rendered will have direct, enforceable, or constitutive effects on the legal sphere of the third party.
This publication was prepared by Daniel Majewski del Castillo and Zusel Soto Vilchis.
