MEXICO Law and Practice Contributed by: Agustín Aguilar López, Carlos García Cueva, Claudio Catalán Arvide and Joana Karime Novia Ibarra, Aziz & Kaye Business Law
Aziz & Kaye Business Law Paseo de la Reforma 2620-304 Lomas Altas Miguel Hidalgo Ciudad de México 11950 Mexico Tel: +52 555 985 6605 Email: administracion@azizkaye.com Web: www.azizkaye.com
1. Introduction 1.1 Current Framework for Private Antitrust Litigation In December 2024, a set of major constitutional reforms, including several with significant implica - tions for antitrust law in Mexico, was approved by Congress. These reforms triggered a transformation process that led to the dissolution of the Federal Institute of Telecommunications (IFT) and the Federal Economic Competition Commission (COFECE), two constitutionally autonomous authorities responsible for enforcing competition rules in the telecommuni - cations and broadcasting sectors (IFT) and in all other markets (COFECE). Their functions are now in process of being transferred to a new decentralised agency under the Ministry of Economy: The National Antimo - nopoly Commission (CNA or the “Commission”). These changes took effect with the publication of the reforms to the Federal Economic Competition Law (FECL) on 16 July 2025. Even though the new FECL entered into force on 17 July 2025, there are still sev - eral steps required for the CNA to formally start its operations. According to the transitory provisions of the reform, the CNA will replace COFECE and the IFT until the integration of its Board of Commissioners. It is important to highlight that although the FECL was reformed, it still does not provide for private antitrust litigation. In this regard, under the reformed FECL, only the CNA may investigate and sanction anti-com -
petitive practices in every sector and market of the Mexican economy. However, individuals may still report or, if they ful - fil the requirements provided by Article 68 of FECL, file a complaint against any alleged anti-competitive conduct. The Commission will then analyse these to determine whether there is sufficient basis to initiate a formal investigation. Following the investigation, considering that the Com - mission’s Investigative Authority (IA) finds sufficient evidence that supports and indictment, the Board of Commissioners of the CNA will decide on the merits of the case on a trial-like proceeding. If the Board decides to sanction an economic agent for engaging in anti-competitive conduct (cartels, abuse of domi - nance or unlawful mergers), the sanctioned party may challenge the decision by filing a constitutional appeal ( amparo lawsuit). The purpose of this appeal is to determine whether the proceedings conducted by, and the decision of, the CNA were in accordance with the Constitution, specifically whether there is any potential infringement of fundamental rights. It is important to note that, unlike in other jurisdictions, Mexican courts do not determine whether a violation of the FECL has been committed. Nonetheless, as will be discussed, allegedly affected parties may seek compensation for damages arising from anti-competi - tive conduct by filing a claim before the federal courts specialised in competition, telecommunications and broadcasting.
112 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook