MEXICO Law and Practice Contributed by: Jorge Asali, Omar Colomé, Rodrigo Macin and Saul Fonseca, Bufete Asali
• legal representation costs, either entirely to one party or shared between the parties; and • interest, as a form of compensation, which is typi - cally governed by the applicable substantive law chosen by the parties or determined by the tribunal under conflict rules; there is no prohibition against awarding pre- or post-award interest, and tribunals seated in Mexico regularly include such interest. 11. Review of an Award 11.1 Grounds for Appeal Under Mexican law, arbitral awards are not subject to appeal. The only available remedies are: • annulment proceedings, which may be brought by the losing party before the competent court; and • refusal of recognition and enforcement, which may be raised by a respondent when an award is being enforced. Both remedies are pursued through the special com - mercial proceeding for settlement agreements and arbitration, governed by the Mexican Commerce Code. Once that process concludes, the losing party may seek constitutional relief ( amparo indirecto ). There is ongoing debate regarding the correct form of amparo, since the Amparo Law establishes that final decisions in judicial proceedings should be reviewed through amparo directo . Nonetheless, a binding prec - edent currently allows amparo indirecto , despite sig - nificant criticism regarding its consistency with the Amparo Law and the fact that amparo indirecto has two instances while amparo directo only has one, thus generating lengthier proceedings. The grounds for annulment or refusal of recognition mirror those found in Article V of the New York Con - vention and Articles 1457 and 1462 of the Mexican Commerce Code. 11.2 Excluding/Expanding the Scope of Appeal Under Mexican law, judicial appeals of arbitral awards are not permitted, and the parties cannot expand judi - cial review by agreement. Courts have no jurisdiction
to hear appeals against arbitral awards, as such a mechanism is simply not contemplated in the legal framework. However, parties could theoretically agree to an inter - nal appeal mechanism within the arbitral process by providing that an award may be reviewed by a sec - ond arbitral tribunal constituted for that purpose. This type of contractual arbitral appeal would be valid and enforceable. In any case, regardless of such internal mechanisms, the only recourse available before national courts remains annulment or refusal of recognition/enforce - ment, under the grounds set out in Articles 1457 and 1462 of the Commerce Code and Article V of the New York Convention. 11.3 Standard of Judicial Review Mexican courts apply a highly deferential standard of review to arbitral awards. The Supreme Court of Justice (SCJN) has made clear that judicial scrutiny is strictly limited to procedural violations and does not extend to revisiting the merits of the case. In particular, the Court has emphasised that the grounds for setting aside an award – such as those found in Article 1457 (I)(b) in connection with Article 1434 of the Mexican Commerce Code – refer exclu - sively to violations of procedural fairness, such as inequality of treatment or denial of the opportunity to present one’s case during the arbitration proceedings. They do not cover dissatisfaction with how arbitrators assessed the evidence or interpreted the law.
12. Enforcement of an Award 12.1 New York Convention
Mexico acceded to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in 1971, without making any reservations. 12.2 Enforcement Procedure The standard for enforcing an arbitral award in Mexi - co essentially mirrors the grounds for annulment, but applied inversely. That is, enforcement will be denied only if one of the grounds listed in Article 1462 of the
544 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook