Theses and Case Law/ Litigation / byDaniel Majewski del Castillo, Zusel Soto Vilchis, José Alejandro Krause Marún,David Fernando Santos Mejía, and Carla Itzel Rincón Guerrero.
In this #ThesisFriday | September 5, 2025, the Judicial Weekly published 94 new rulings: 17 case law decisions and 77 isolated rulings.
We have selected the most relevant ones for you, which were issued by the Regional Circuit Plenary Sessions and the Collegiate Circuit Courts:
Abstracts
Digital registration number: 2031132 / Thesis: III.2o.C.47 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Actions for emotional distress and compensatory damages between private individuals. Federal courts lack jurisdiction over such civil cases due to the jurisdiction of the courts of the respective states.
In a civil lawsuit involving emotional distress and damages between private individuals, federal courts lack jurisdiction over such cases, even when provisions of the Federal Civil Code are invoked; therefore, the local court has jurisdiction to resolve such disputes.
Digital registration number: 2031133 / Thesis: III.2o.C.43 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
A provisional stay of execution is granted in an indirect appeal against the court order requiring a general warehouse to secure or seize goods in its custody pursuant to a commercial storage contract.
A provisional stay of execution is granted in an indirect appeal against a court order requiring a general warehouse to secure goods under a commercial contract, when there are no seized warehouse receipts.
Digital registration number: 2031155 / Thesis: I.8o.C.28 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Punitive damages should not be included in compensation awarded under civil liability.
In a standard civil lawsuit involving strict liability, punitive damages should not be taken into account when calculating civil liability damages in Mexico, since it was held that the legislature must first define the factual elements constituting the violation and establishing liability in the most comprehensive and precise manner
Digital registration number: 2031153 / Thesis: VII.1o.C.19 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The imposition of costs in the appellate court is improper if the appellate court modifies the judgment of the trial court (Legislation of the State of Veracruz de Ignacio de la Llave).
It is improper to award costs in the appellate court when the appellate court modifies the appealed decision, regardless of whether the modification concerns the merits of the case or only the costs of the lower court, and not as a result of procedural conduct on the part of the opposing party.
Digital registration number: 2031151 / Thesis: I.11o.C.73 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
To establish the existence of a loan agreement, it must be shown that the alleged debtor consented to repay a specific amount of money to the alleged creditor.
For a loan agreement—whether civil or commercial—to be valid, two essential elements must be present: (i) the lender or creditor must actually transfer a specific amount of money or fungible goods to the borrower or debtor; and (ii) the borrower or debtor must assume the obligation to return an equivalent amount of the same kind and quality to the creditor.
Digital registration number: 2031139 / Thesis: II.2o.C.5 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The amendment to Articles 25, 27, and 28 of the Federal Constitution, published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 31, 2024, did not alter the private nature of the legal acts arising from electricity supply contracts entered into with CFE; therefore, disputes arising from such contracts must be resolved through commercial proceedings.
The 2024 amendment to Articles 25, 27, and 28 of the Constitution did not reclassify acts arising from electricity supply contracts entered into between private individuals and the CFE as administrative acts; rather, these acts remain of a commercial nature and must be adjudicated in the commercial courts, as the amendment held that the CFE may enter into legal acts in coordination with private individuals.
Digital registration number: 2031147 / Thesis: I.11o.C.72 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
In civil matters, the party who fails to present evidence to support its claim or defense shall be ordered to pay the costs, since the term “rinda” must be understood to refer to the presentation of evidence.
In civil matters, the party that fails to present or adduce evidence to support its claim or defense shall be ordered to pay the costs, since the term “rinda” in Article 140 of the CPCDF must be understood to refer to the actual adduction of evidence.
Digital registration number: 2031167 / Thesis: XXX.1.1 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Proceedings under non-contentious jurisdiction to correct the location, area, dimensions, and boundaries of a piece of real property. An appeal for revocation may be filed against a decision dismissing such proceedings.
A ruling dismissing a non-contentious proceeding to correct property registry records may be challenged by filing an appeal for revocation pursuant to Article 394 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the State of Aguascalientes.
Digital registration: 2031162 / Thesis: VIII.1o.C.T.10 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
In order to review and approve a proposal from the Board of Directors that could adversely affect the rights of shareholders and/or partners of business entities, a special meeting must be held.
If a decision by the Board of Directors may affect the rights of a particular class of shareholders or partners, a special meeting must be held in accordance with Article 195 of the General Law on Commercial Companies; otherwise, the resolution of an ordinary or extraordinary meeting has no effect on those partners.
Digital registration: 2031158 / Thesis: (Region V) 4.7 C (11th)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
In commercial litigation, if the plaintiff fails to produce the original document on which the claim is based, the judge must give the plaintiff an opportunity to produce it before dismissing the complaint.
The Commercial Code provides that, if a complaint is unclear or fails to meet legal requirements, the judge must notify the plaintiff once, clearly pointing out the deficiencies. Thus, if the original document on which the action is based is not produced, the judge must request it before dismissing the complaint. This ensures procedural equality between the parties and a prompt and equitable resolution.
Digital registration number: 2031157 / Thesis: II.2o.C.4 K (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
An application for constitutional protection filed online should not be rejected if it includes the complainant’s scanned handwritten signature or the electronic signature of their authorized attorney.
An online petition for constitutional protection may be dismissed only if there is no evidence of the petitioner’s intent; however, when the petition contains the authorized representative’s electronic signature and the petitioner’s digitized handwritten signature, this should be considered a remediable irregularity rather than grounds for dismissal, as access to justice should be facilitated rather than restricted by formalities.
Digital registration number: 2031187 / Thesis: III.2o.C.41 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
In commercial trials, the statute of limitations may apply.
The principle of party disposition also applies in commercial oral trials, which means that the parties must advance the proceedings until they are ready for resolution; if they fail to do so, the case may be dismissed pursuant to Article 1076 of the Commercial Code. Although the judge plays a more active role and may act on his own initiative, the parties’ obligation to move the proceedings forward remains in all phases, and the principle of resolving the merits over procedural formalities does not preclude the application of the statute of limitations.
Digital registration number: 2031189 / Thesis: III.2o.C.45 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
National water concessionaires do not have standing to seek judicial restitution of the concession assets in the event of dispossession or trespass.
Federal public property cannot be sold, forfeited due to lapse of time, or seized, and no one may claim it as their own. Concessionaires have the right to use such property only in accordance with the law and their concession agreement; however, they are neither owners nor even possessors. Only the Federal Government, through Conagua or other agencies, may take legal action regarding this property.
Digital registration number: 2031197 / Thesis: I.6o.A.15 A (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
Euthanasia and Animal Welfare in Mexico City: Requirement for Specialized Veterinarians.
Animals are sentient beings that deserve care, proper treatment, and protection from abuse. Therefore, the euthanasia of animals with severe behavioral problems or that pose a danger must be performed by an animal behavior specialist. This requirement does not infringe on professional autonomy, because the professional remains free to perform other duties, such as diagnosing and treating illnesses or performing euthanasia in cases of severe injuries or illnesses that cause suffering.
Digital registration number: 2031136 / Thesis: PR.A.C.CS. J/32 A (11th)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
To challenge the freezing or seizure of bank accounts through an indirect writ of amparo, jurisdiction lies with the district court of the place where the account was opened or where notice of the order was received.
Although an order to freeze or seize a bank account is executed at the branch where the account was opened, its effects are felt wherever the account holder attempts to use it. Therefore, in an indirect appeal against such an order, the district court with jurisdiction is the one in the location where the account was opened or in the location where the account holder was denied access to it.
Digital registration number: 2031221 / Thesis: II.2o.C.4 C (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
In bank loan agreements, judges must review ex officio whether the agreed-upon interest rates are usurious, even if their legality is presumed because they are regulated by the Bank of Mexico.
The Supreme Court ruled that interest rates on bank loans are presumed to be lawful because they are supervised by the Bank of Mexico. However, judges must review ex officio whether these rates—both ordinary and late payment rates—are excessive or usurious, in order to protect the borrower and prevent the financial institution from obtaining an undue benefit. If usury is detected, the rates must be corrected to prevent financial harm to the borrower.
Digital record: 2031213 / Thesis: II.2o.C.6 K (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The separation of issues in an amparo proceeding does not imply that the case is referred to other courts.
In indirect amparo proceedings, the separation of cases does not allow for the transfer of cases to other courts; the separated cases continue to be processed by the same court that ordered the separation, unless there is a legal basis that precludes its jurisdiction. Separation creates independent case files, and the Case Management Office only assigns case numbers, without the authority to reassign cases. This ensures legal certainty, procedural efficiency, and respect for jurisdictional authority.
Digital registration number: 2031204 / Thesis: I.13o.A.7 A (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The timely filing of an appeal for indirect legal protection online by indigenous individuals and communities.
Judges must apply procedural requirements in a flexible and reasonable manner so as not to prevent cases from being resolved on their merits, while respecting the right of access to justice. The Supreme Court’s Protocol for Adjudication with an Intercultural Perspective states that the obstacles faced by indigenous individuals, peoples, and communities—such as the digital divide—must be taken into account. Therefore, filing an online complaint the day after the deadline expires is considered appropriate to protect their right to justice and eliminate unnecessary barriers.
Digital registration: 2031152 / Thesis: PR.A.C.CN. J/95 A (11th)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
The Agreement establishing the general provisions governing the operation, organization, and functioning of the Public Registry of Pawnshops constitutes a self-enforcing regulatory system for the purposes of amparo proceedings.
This is because service providers who habitually or professionally engage in or offer to the public interest-bearing loan transactions secured by a pledge, in order to obtain the registration authorizing them to conduct such transactions, must register with the relevant Public Registry, as this is a system applicable to such establishments from the moment it enters into force, without any conditions attached, and this authorizes the parties subject to it to challenge all provisions that are applicable to them or that may eventually become applicable to them upon its entry into force.
Digital registration: 2031209 / Thesis: PR.A.C.CS. J/33 A (11th)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
Section 19(VIII) of the Agreement governing the operation of the Public Registry of Pawnshops is subject to further administrative action, as its legal effect depends on a subsequent administrative act.
In this case, the provision in question takes effect only when the initial application for registration is filed; prior to that, the provision does not impose a general and immediate obligation, does not in and of itself alter the legal status of those seeking to operate as pawnshops, and expressly refers to future, voluntary action on the part of the individual or entity concerned: applying to the Federal Consumer Protection Agency for registration.
Digital registration number: 2031160 / Thesis: PR.A.C.CS. J/31 K (11th)
Case Law of Regional Circuit Courts
The element of the right to petition consisting of the “short period” involves a balancing test that must be conducted when deciding the merits of the amparo proceeding.
In the context of an amparo proceeding alleging a violation of the right to petition, the adjudicating body must analyze and establish the time limit that, based on the specific circumstances of the case, is deemed appropriate and maximum for the relevant authority to respond to the petition filed. Therefore, the amparo petition alleging the aforementioned violation should not be dismissed outright on the grounds that the grounds for dismissal provided for in Article 61, Section XXIII, are manifestly and undoubtedly present.
Digital registration: 2031165 / Thesis: II.2o.C.5 K (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
In a direct appeal, a motion to dismiss is not admissible with respect to the grounds for violation, as these do not constitute the acts being challenged.
This is because a partial withdrawal of the complaint must necessarily pertain to a specific act being challenged (where the nature of the proceeding permits), and not to the allegations of violation, since these constitute arguments aimed at challenging the constitutionality or legality of such acts. Consequently, they do not form part of the subject matter of the fundamental rights proceeding, and therefore, with respect to them, the purported partial withdrawal of the complaint lacks legal effect.
Digital registration number: 2031190 / Thesis: I.20o.A.28 A (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The prohibition on registering a descriptive trademark set forth in Article 173, Section IV, of the Federal Law on the Protection of Industrial Property is intended to prevent unfair competition.
The prohibition on registering a descriptive trademark is intended to prevent unfair competition in the marketplace, as it ensures that businesses operating in a particular economic sector do not obtain exclusive rights to a term that describes the characteristics of products or services available on the market—a term that is so common that all such businesses have the right to use it in the labeling and advertising of their products or services.
Digital record: 2031200 / Thesis: III.2o.C.23 K (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The failure to regulate the right to join a complaint in the Amparo Act is constitutional.
This omission of a formal response to the complaint allows the complaint to be resolved more quickly and does not prevent the opposing party from filing a brief challenging the claim made in the complaint or even its admissibility, leading to the conclusion that such treatment is reasonable and objective.
Digital record: 2031215 / Thesis: II.1o.A.7 K (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The deficiency in the complaint shall be waived in favor of individuals who serve as primary caregivers.
The complaint is valid because this primary caregiving work is generally performed by women and perpetuates inequalities, restricts access to essential rights, and leads to consequences such as less time for education and social participation. Likewise, it hinders access to the labor market and social security, creates precariousness, and encourages entry into informal and low-income jobs. This places caregivers in a situation of structural disadvantage that restricts the full and effective exercise of their rights, and therefore they require special protection in the judicial sphere.
Digital record: 2031211 / Thesis: II.1o.A.38 K (11a.)
Individual Opinion of the Circuit Courts
The amparo proceeding is the appropriate means for courts to establish effective mechanisms for comprehensive redress for human rights violations.
This is because court rulings in this regard may include specific orders directed at state authorities to restore the enjoyment of rights and ensure their effective exercise. Furthermore, amparo rulings, in and of themselves, constitute measures of redress by officially recognizing the existence of a human rights violation, which helps restore individuals’ dignity.
Digital registration number: 2031178 / Thesis: PR.P.T.CS.9 K (11th ed.)
Isolated Thesis: Regional Circuit Plenary Sessions
When resolving conflicts of interpretation, Regional Circuit Courts may rely on well-known facts.
Pursuant to Article 88 of the Federal Code of Civil Procedure, well-known facts may be invoked by courts in the resolution of cases. In this context, pursuant to the analogous application of Article 75 of the Amparo Law, members of the Regional Plenary Sessions may invoke public and well-known facts—such as those visible on official websites—as evidence to resolve conflicts of interpretation, since the decisions they render in such matters constitute binding precedents governing an entire judicial region of the country.
Prepared by Daniel Majewski del Castillo, Zusel Soto Vilchis, José Alejandro Krause Marún,David Fernando Santos Mejía, and Carla Itzel Rincón Guerrero.
