MEXICO Law and Practice Contributed by: Fernando del Castillo Elorza, Sajid Arroyo, Andrea Hernández and Alexis Romero, Del Castillo & Castro Abogados
(ii) security measures, designed to safeguard the out- come of the proceedings by preventing the dissipation of assets, the concealment of persons or the tam- pering with relevant evidence. Examples of the latter include the following: • precautionary attachment or freezing order, which restrains a debtor from alienating assets to secure satisfaction of the claim; • passport orders or restraining orders, which seek to prevent a party from absconding to frustrate the proceedings; and • freezing order over stock market securities to pre- vent their transfer, sale or use in new transactions pending litigation or arbitration. 6.2 Interim Relief to Support Arbitration and ADR Mexican law provides for concurrent jurisdiction in respect of interim measures in arbitration: both the courts and the arbitral tribunal have competence to grant such measures, and a party may apply to either. An arbitral tribunal, however, has no power of enforce- ment. Consequently, court assistance is required to enforce any interim measure granted by the tribunal. 6.3 Timing of Applications for Interim Relief Mexican law provides that interim measures may be applied for either prior to the commencement of pro- ceedings or during their pendency. As pre-trial injunc- tions are granted ex parte, that is, without a hearing or notice to the opposing party, petitioners typically elect to proceed on this basis. 6.4 Security for Costs Mexico has no equivalent to the application for “secu- rity of costs”. 6.5 Interim Injunctions Interim injunctions are statutory mechanisms available to safeguard any right at risk of infringement; any party to proceedings may therefore apply for such relief. Judges will generally grant an injunction if certain requirements are met, including: • the applicant’s entitlement to the right sought to be protected;
• the necessity of the measure; and, where applica- ble, • a real risk of dissipation or concealment of assets against which a final judgment may be enforced. 6.6 Summary Judgment Mexico has no equivalent to the “summary judgment” procedure. The closest concept is the “summary pro- ceeding”, a form of expedited process designed to be conducted more concisely and to conclude in a significantly shorter timeframe than ordinary proceed- ings. The most common examples include: • actions for the enforcement of negotiable instru- 7. Mass Claims and Class Actions 7.1 Procedural Mechanisms Class actions in Mexico are regulated under Section Six of the National Code of Civil and Family Proce- dure. These provisions establish a specialised proce- dural framework for the protection of collective rights and interests, which may only be invoked in matters relating to consumer relationships (involving goods or services, whether public or private) and environmental protection. Although this framework is now governed by the National Code of Civil and Family Procedure, it was previously regulated under the Federal Code of Civil Procedure. The key difference is that the new Code adopts a more flexible and protective approach, in particular through the introduction of a certification stage, allowing courts to reclassify incorrectly framed actions, strengthening the principle of full reparation, and extending the limitation period from three-and-a- half years to five years. ments such as promissory notes; • real estate lease proceedings; and • mortgage foreclosure proceedings. The Code recognises three types of collective actions: (i) diffuse actions, concerning indivisible rights held by an indeterminate group; (ii) collective actions in the strict sense, concerning indivisible rights held by a determinate or determinable group linked by com- mon circumstances; and (iii) homogeneous individual
370 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook