MEXICO Law and Practice Contributed by: Fernando del Castillo Elorza, Sajid Arroyo, Andrea Hernández and Alexis Romero, Del Castillo & Castro Abogados
9.2 Enforcement of Arbitral Awards The Special Commercial Transactions Proceedings provided in the Commercial Code is the procedure through which a request is made for the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award rendered in an arbitration conducted domestically or abroad. 9.3 Length of Time The duration is contingent on judicial caseload; ordi- narily, enforcement proceedings are concluded within two to three years. 9.4 Grounds for Resisting Enforcement Under Mexican law, the grounds for a party to resist or oppose the enforcement of a foreign judgment or an arbitral award are closely related, although there are some differences. The grounds for setting aside an arbitral award, whether rendered in Mexico or abroad, are as follows. • A party to the arbitration agreement lacked capac- ity, or the agreement is invalid under the governing law. • A party was not given proper notice of the arbi- trator’s appointment or the proceedings or was otherwise unable to present its case. • The award deals with a dispute not contemplated by the arbitration agreement or contains decisions beyond its scope. • The composition of the tribunal or the arbitral pro- cedure did not accord with the parties’ agreement. • The subject matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under Mexican law. • The award conflicts with Mexican public policy.
The grounds for opposing enforcement of a foreign judgment, which are distinct from those for arbitral awards, include: • failure to comply with the formalities under the Inter-American Convention on Service Abroad; • the judgment arises from an in rem action; • the judgment lacks res judicata effect in the coun- try of origin; • the underlying claim is subject to lis pendens before a Mexican court; and • absence of reciprocity – ie, the enforcing party can- not prove that Mexican judgments are enforceable in the country of origin in similar cases. There are no specific laws yet; however, recent Supreme Court guidelines set ethical rules for using artificial intelligence. These rules require strict data protection, clear transparency and mandatory human supervision. 10.2 Impact Federal courts now officially allow artificial intelligence to help calculate financial guarantees. This makes the process much faster without taking away the judge’s fundamental role in making decisions. 10.3 Future Supreme Court publications show a careful accept- ance of technology to help with administrative and mathematical tasks. This is expected to grow slowly within strict limits, ensuring that artificial intelligence only assists, rather than replaces, human judges and lawyers. 10. Dispute Resolution and AI 10.1 Regulation
373 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook