MEXICO Trends and Developments Contributed by: Aldo Ocampo and Arturo Caballero Rossetti, OCAMPO 1890
An important qualification should be noted. On 1 June 2026, deciding Direct Amparos in Review 7469 / 2024 and 4006 / 2025 , the court held that provisions using the Unit of Measurement and Update or the minimum wage as a compensation benchmark are compatible with the Constitution provided they operate as guiding references and not as absolute limits. The distinction between a “guiding reference” and a “compensation ceiling” is today the central argumentative axis of the insurer’s quantum defence. As a severity benchmark, it is worth recalling that Direct Amparo 30 / 2013 – the Mayan Palace case, decided on 26 February 2014 – resulted in an award of MXN30,259,200.00 (around USD1.8 million) and established the quantification parameters that still govern: the nature of the right infringed, the gravity of the harm, the degree of responsibility and the eco- nomic position of the party liable, with express recog- nition of the deterrent function of the award. Moral and punitive damages as an ordinary insurer risk The most significant development of the period is that moral and punitive damages have ceased to be an exceptional risk and have become an ordinary one, expressly tied to the insurer’s conduct in handling the claim. Binding precedent 1a./J. 122/2025, published on 4 July 2025 and derived from Direct Amparo in Review 4306 / 2020 , establishes that breach of an insurance contract in the face of a health condition may give rise to a presumption of moral damage, particularly where the insurer repeatedly and groundlessly refuses pay- ment and additionally requires the insured to undergo unnecessary medical examinations despite already being aware of the exclusion it intends to invoke. The protected interest is the right to privacy and intimacy; under Article 1916 of the Federal Civil Code, moral damage is presumed where psychological integrity is impaired. Binding precedent 1a./J. 123/2025, from the same precedent and publication date, goes further: it rec- ognises that punitive damages lie for breach of an insurance contract connected to the rights to life, physical integrity or health, and specifies the triggers.
They lie where the insurer acts in bad faith, “particu- larly if it failed to deliver the general conditions or if these were not registered with the National Insurance and Surety Commission”. The judge must assess the intensity of the gravity of the conduct and the degree of reproachability. The operational consequence is direct and unavoid- able: two failures of an essentially administrative nature – documented delivery of the general condi- tions, and prior registration of the technical note with the National Insurance and Surety Commission – have become triggers of uncapped non-contractual liability. The risk has migrated from the legal function to opera- tions and compliance. This vector is compounded by binding precedent 1a./J. 112/2025, under which the mere publication of policies or conditions on a website does not imply consumer consent: clear and timely access to the con- ditions at the time of contracting must be evidenced. For portfolios placed through digital and bancassur- ance channels, the applicable evidentiary standard is now materially higher than prevailing market practice has assumed. The expanding perimeter of exposure Four further developments widen the temporal, per- sonal and quantitative perimeter of exposure. Limitation Deciding Direct Amparo in Review 4165 / 2022 , the First Chamber disapplied the two-year limitation peri- od of Article 81 (II) of the LCS in respect of personal insurance, holding it irrational where bodily integrity is the interest at stake, and applied a five-year peri- od. In Direct Amparo in Review 2128 / 2023 , decided on 24 January 2024, it extended the same reason- ing to civil liability policies where beneficiaries claim in respect of the death of a third party, identifying a “point of convergence” with life insurance. The effect on claims development and on reserves for incurred but not reported claims is evident: the exposure tail in the affected lines has more than doubled. Third party ’ s direct action By an isolated thesis published on 8 May 2026, deriv- ing from Direct Amparo 450 / 2025 , a Circuit Court in
195 I NSURANCE L I T IGATI O N 2026
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook