MEXICO Law and Practice Contributed by: Agustín Aguilar López, Carlos García Cueva, Claudio Catalán Arvide and Joana Karime Novia Ibarra, Aziz & Kaye Business Law
at least 30 individuals. Civil associations or non-profit organisations that were legally constituted at least one year prior to filing the action may also be certified, provided their corporate purpose includes the pro - motion or defence of the rights and interests relevant to the matter, and they comply with the requirements set forth in the Code. Additionally, the Office of the Attorney General and the Federal Institute of Public Defender’s Office may be certified to represent the class. At the certification stage, the judge must determine whether the claim meets the requirements established by the Federal Code of Civil Procedures. This includes, for example, a clear identification of the affected dif - fuse, collective, or individual homogeneous right, as well as the supporting considerations and facts that justify pursuing the matter through collective rather than individual action. The judge must also assess whether the claim satis - fies specific standing requirements, such as: (i) if the alleged conduct harmed consumers as a result of anti- competitive practices, based on a resolution issued by the competition authorities; (ii) whether there is a clear connection between the object of the action and the harm suffered; and (iii) whether the action is not time-barred. If the judge concludes that these requirements are not met, the class action will be dismissed. Collective actions may be brought by communities of consumers or by companies that were directly or indirectly affected – such as direct competitors or businesses within the same value chain. 5. Choice of Jurisdiction 5.1 Rules on Jurisdiction and Applicable Law In Mexico, there is a single antitrust statute – the FECL – which applies throughout the entire national terri - tory. Only the CNA has jurisdiction to enforce antitrust matters (once it formally begins operating), and only specialised federal antitrust courts are competent to hear claims for damages arising from anti-competitive conduct.
The applicable laws governing the substantive reso - lution of the dispute and the procedural aspects of such claims are the Federal Civil Code and the Federal Code of Civil Procedures.
6. Disclosure/Discovery 6.1 Disclosure/Discovery Procedure
The FECL does not provide for any discovery proce - dures, however, in the authors’ experience and follow - ing the US authorities’ practice, the now-extinct IFT and COFECE have informally initiated requests with the characteristics of a discovery. It is with noting that attempts by the previous com - petition authorities to carry out discovery proceedings have been unsuccessful, as economic agents have successfully argued that discovery is not recognised under Mexican law. In damages proceedings, however, parties may request the court to order the production of docu - ments held by any person, subject to certain limita - tions. Such requests may only be granted if (i) the documents are not protected by professional secrecy or considered private communications, and (ii) the documents are relevant to the damages claim. 6.2 Legal Professional Privilege Legal professional privilege is a constitutional right, provided for in Article 16 of the Mexican Constitution. In this regard, the reformed FECL incorporates in its legal text a specific procedure to guarantee the protection of communications between clients and their lawyers. This regulatory provision represents an advance over the previous regime, in which COFECE had established a procedure through regulatory provi - sions. With the inclusion of Article 77 Bis, the mechanism for the classification and protection of information is given greater hierarchy, aligning this right with basic principles of due process and adequate defence. Regarding claims procedures, the Federal Code of Civil Procedures provides that those individuals
116 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook