Mexico: Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters

Only that the enforcement of the foreign judgment is not contrary to Mexican domestic law.

Yes, Mexican Law does not require that foreign judgments are issued by a country with which there is a specific treaty or convention in force.

Is it limited to money judgments or does it extend to other forms of relief? Foreign judgments, private arbitral rulings of a non-commercial nature and other foreign jurisdictional resolutions are effective and will be recognised in Mexico in all matters that are not contrary to domestic public order under the terms of the Constitution and other applicable laws, except for the provisions of treaties and conventions to which Mexico is a party.

It is overall the same procedure, whether it follows a convention, treaty or arrangement or under the general law; however, there are some additional specific requirements that the judgment must satisfy in order to be recognised and enforceable, as follows:

Inter-American Convention on Extraterritorial Validity of Foreign Judgments and Arbitral Awards

As to the substance matter, the Convention applies to judgments and arbitral awards rendered in civil, commercial or labour proceedings in one of the States parties thereto, unless at the time of ratification it makes an express reservation to limit the Convention to judgments of a patrimonial nature (actions in rem).

When ratifying the Convention, the member countries had the opportunity to declare that it also applies to judgments terminating a proceeding, to decisions of authorities exercising a judicial function and to judgments in criminal proceedings ordering compensation for damages resulting from an offence.

Regarding the form, the foreign judgments, awards and decisions shall have extraterritorial validity in the States Parties if they meet the following conditions:

1. They fulfill all the formal requirements necessary for them to be deemed authentic in the State of origin.
2. The judgment, award or decision and the documents attached thereto that are required under this Convention are duly translated into the official language of the State where they are to take effect.
3. They are presented having been duly legalised in accordance with the law of the State in which they are to take effect.
4. The judge or tribunal rendering the judgment is competent in the international sphere to try the matter and to pass judgment on it in accordance with the law of the State in which the judgment, award or decision is to take effect.
5. The plaintiff has been summoned or subpoenaed in due legal form substantially equivalent to that accepted by the law of the State where the judgment, award or decision is to take effect.
6. The parties had an opportunity to present their defence.
7. They are final or, where appropriate, have the force of res judicata in the State in which they were rendered.
8. They are not manifestly contrary to the principles and laws of the public policy (public order) of the State in which recognition or execution is sought.

The documents of proof required to request execution of judgments, awards and decisions are as follows:

• a certified copy of the judgment, ruling, or decision;
• a certified copy of the documents proving that the provisions of items e. and f. above have been complied with; and
• a certified copy of the document stating that the judgment, award, or decision is final or has the force of res judicata.

 Inter-American Convention on Competence in the International Sphere for the Extraterritorial Validity of Foreign Judgments

This Convention establishes, as substance, the requirements for the extraterritorial validity of foreign judgments, stating that the requirement of international jurisdiction is deemed met when the judicial authority or other judicial authority of the State Party that rendered the judgment would have been competent in accordance with any of the following provisions, which give entry to the required form:

1. In an in-persona action for a money judgment, any of the following bases shall be satisfied:
   1. At the time the action was commenced, the defendant, if a natural person, had his domicile or habitual residence in the territory of the State Party in which the judgment was rendered, or, if a juridical person, had his principal place of business in that territory.
   2. In an action against a private non-commercial or business enterprise, the defendant had its principal place of business at the time the action was commenced in the State Party in which the judgment was rendered or was organised in that State Party.
   3. In an action against a branch, agency, or subsidiary of a private non-commercial or business enterprise, the activities giving rise to such action took place in the State Party in which the judgment was rendered.
   4. In the case of non-exclusive forums that permit submission to other forums, the defendant consented in writing to the jurisdiction of the judicial or other adjudicatory authority that rendered the judgment or, despite having entered an appearance, failed to file a timely challenge to the jurisdiction of such authority.
2. In an action involving rights relating to tangible personal property, one of the following bases must be met:
   1. the property was, at the time the action was commenced, located in the territory of the State Party in which the judgment was rendered, or
   2. any one of the bases provided for in section A above is met.
3. In an action relating to property rights in immovable property, the property was, at the time the action was commenced, in the territory of the State Party in which the judgment was rendered.
4. In an action arising out of an international commercial contract, the parties agreed in writing to submit to the jurisdiction of the State Party where the judgment was rendered, provided that such jurisdiction has not been established abusively and has a reasonable connection with the subject matter of the action.

 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards

The substantive requirement derives from the fact that the object of the Convention is the application of the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards rendered in the territory of a State other than the State where the recognition and enforcement of such awards are sought, and which arise out of disputes between natural or legal persons.  It also applies to arbitral awards which are not considered as domestic awards in the State where their recognition and enforcement is sought.

The formal requirements established by the Convention to obtain the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award are based on the fact that the party requesting the recognition and enforcement must submit, together with the application:

1. the duly authenticated original of the judgment or a copy of that original that meets the conditions required for its authenticity; or
2. the original of the agreement referred to in Article II of the Convention, or a copy thereof which satisfies the conditions required for its authenticity.

It is important to note that in the event that the award or agreement is not in an official language of the country in which the award is invoked, the party seeking recognition and enforcement of the award must submit a translation of such documents into that language.  The translation shall be certified by an official translator or a sworn translator, or by a diplomatic or consular agent.

Inter-American Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial or Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters

The States signed the above-mentioned Convention with the aim of creating the necessary means to ensure that judicial and extrajudicial documents to be served abroad are known by their addressees in a timely manner, and in order to provide proper judicial assistance, simplifying and accelerating the procedure.

The Convention applies, in civil or commercial matters, to all cases in which a judicial or extrajudicial document must be sent abroad for service.  The Convention does not apply where the address of the addressee of the document is unknown.

The form is carried out in the sense that each Contracting State shall designate a central authority to assume the function of receiving requests for service from another Contracting State and further processing them.  Each State shall organise the central authority in accordance with its own law.  The authority or ministerial or judicial officer competent under the laws of the State of origin shall address, to the central authority of the State addressed, a request in accordance with the model form annexed to the Convention, without the need for the legalisation of documents or any other similar formality.  The request shall be accompanied by the judicial document or a copy thereof, all in duplicate.

The central authority of the State addressed shall proceed or order service of the document either:

1. according to the forms prescribed by the law of the State addressed for the service of documents executed in that country and intended for persons within its territory; or
2. in the particular form requested by the applicant, provided that it is not incompatible with the law of the requested State.

Except in the case provided for in subparagraph b., the document may always be delivered to the addressee, who accepts it voluntarily.  If the document is to be served in accordance with the first subparagraph, the central authority may request that the document be drawn up or translated into the official language or one of the official languages of its country.  The part of the request which, in accordance with the standard form annexed to the Convention, contains the essential elements of the document, shall be sent to the addressee.

Inter-American Convention on Jurisdiction in the International Sphere for the Extraterritorial Effectiveness of Foreign Judgments

As to the substantive requirements, the Convention establishes that in order for foreign judgments to have extraterritorial effectiveness, in addition to having the character of res judicata, they must be susceptible of recognition or enforcement throughout the territory of the State Party where they were pronounced.

The formal requirements of the Convention are that in order to obtain extraterritorial effectiveness of foreign judgments, the requirement of jurisdiction in the international sphere shall be deemed satisfied when the court of a State Party that has rendered the judgment would have had jurisdiction in accordance with the following provisions:

1. In the case of personal actions of a patrimonial nature, one of the following conditions must be met:
   1. that the defendant, at the time the lawsuit was filed, had his domicile or habitual residence in the territory of the State Party where the judgment was pronounced in the case of natural persons, or that he had his principal place of business in said territory in the case of legal persons;
   2. in the case of actions against private civil or commercial companies, that these, at the time the action was filed, had their principal place of business in the State Party where the judgment was rendered or had been incorporated in said State Party;
   3. in the case of actions against branches, agencies or subsidiaries of private civil or commercial companies, that the activities which gave rise to the respective claims were carried out in the State where the judgment was rendered, or
   4. in matters of waivable jurisdictions, that the defendant has accepted in writing the jurisdiction of the court that pronounced the judgment; or if, despite having appeared in the trial, he has not timely challenged the jurisdiction of such court.
2. In the case of actions in rem on tangible movable property, one of the following conditions must be met:
   1. that a. at the time the suit was brought, the property was located in the territory of the State Party where the judgment was rendered, or b. at the time the suit was brought, the property was located in the territory of the State Party where the judgment was rendered.
   2. That any of the cases provided for in section A above.
3. In the case of actions in rem on immovable property, that the property was located, at the time the lawsuit was filed, in the territory of the State Party where the judgment was rendered.
4. With respect to actions arising out of commercial contracts concluded in the international sphere, that the Parties have agreed in writing to submit to the jurisdiction of the State Party where the judgment was rendered, provided that such jurisdiction has not been established in an abusive manner and that there has been a reasonable connection with the subject matter of the dispute.

The requirement of jurisdiction in the international sphere shall also be deemed to be satisfied if, in the opinion of the court of the State Party where the judgment is to have effect, the court that rendered the judgment assumed jurisdiction in order to avoid denial of justice because there is no competent court.

Convention between the United Mexican States and the United Kingdom of Spain on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judicial Judgments and Arbitral Awards in Civil and Commercial Matters

The substance of this Bilateral Treaty is that the declaratory judgments and arbitral rulings issued in one of the States Parties will be effective and recognised in the other without the need to follow an approval procedure; when they are only to be used as evidence in court, it will be sufficient that they meet the requirements to be considered authentic documents.

It is important to point out that if the judgment or arbitration award cannot be recognised in its entirety, the court may admit its partial effectiveness at the request of the interested party.

In the case of judgments or arbitral awards whose content is contrary to the public policy of the requested State, they will not be recognised.

The judgments and arbitral awards referred to in Title II of this Convention shall be effective and enforceable in the requested State if the requested court determines that they meet the following criteria:

1. They are accompanied by the necessary external formalities to be considered authentic documents in the State of origin.
2. The judgments, arbitral awards and the documents annexed thereto are drafted or translated into the Spanish language.
3. They are duly legalised in accordance with the law of the requested State, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 25.
4. The sentencing judge or court has had jurisdiction in accordance with the bases set forth in Title III of this Convention.
5. In the case of judgments, they must be sentences in patrimonial matters.
6. The defendant has been notified or summoned in due legal form in a manner substantially equivalent to that accepted by the law of the requested State.
7. The defence of the parties has been ensured in the proceedings that gave rise to the judgment or arbitration award.
8. They are enforceable or have the force of res judicata in the State of origin.
9. They are not contrary to the public policy of the requested State.

The initiation of a special proceeding for the homologation of a judgment recognising the existence of a judgment or its enforcement must be filed in writing before the competent court.  It must be accompanied by the resolution duly translated into Spanish, and must not be contrary to the public order of Mexico.

In terms of substance, judgments must comply with the formalities for letters rogatory from abroad.  Those that have been issued because of the exercise of a real action are not admitted.

The judge or sentencing court must have jurisdiction to hear and try the case in accordance with the rules recognised in international law.

The defendant must be notified or summoned in person to ensure the guarantee of a hearing and the exercise of his defence.

The decision must be res judicata in the country in which it was rendered, or there must be no ordinary appeal against it.  The obligation for which compliance has been sought cannot be contrary to public order in Mexico.

The judgment must comply with the requirements to be considered authentic.  As to the form, an authentic copy of the judgment, ruling or jurisdictional resolution is required.  Official translations into Spanish are required for this purpose.

The executor must indicate an address for service of process in the place of the court of the homologation.

The Federal Code of Civil Procedure, which applies supplementary to the Commerce Code, establishes that, for the enforcement of a foreign judgment, an ancillary proceeding for homologation of a foreign judgment must be carried out, therefore, the duration of such proceeding will depend on the type of enforcement to be carried out, as well as the workload of the corresponding judicial authority in Mexico.

In Mexico, provisional remedy can only be requested from the beginning and before the resolution of a judicial proceeding. Consequently, in the ancillary proceeding for homologation of a foreign judgment, a provisional remedy cannot be requested, since such proceeding will only deal with the execution of a foreign judgment, leaving aside the fairness or unfairness of the same, focusing on whether it is contrary or not to Mexican domestic law.

There is no specific regulation under Mexican law regarding a statute of limitations for the enforcement of a foreign judgment.  However, the general statute of limitations for enforcing judgments before Mexican courts is 10 years

The enforcement of foreign judgments will be effective and recognised by Mexico, to the extent that such judgments are not contrary to the internal public order under the terms of the Federal Code of Civil Procedures and other applicable laws, except for the provisions of treaties and conventions to which Mexico is a party.

No. The Mexican authorities may not examine or decide on the fairness or unfairness of the judgment, nor on the motivations or grounds of fact or law on which it is based upon, limiting themselves to examining its authenticity and whether or not it should be executed in accordance with the provisions of national law.

As in the previous question, no.

Do the courts in your jurisdiction impose any requirements on the way in which the defendant was served with the proceedings? 

No.

Can foreign judgments in default be enforced?

It will depend on the type of foreign judgment to be enforced. Once the ancillary proceeding for homologation of a foreign judgment is initiated, the obligations of the defendant will be analyzed. The execution will be carried out in accordance with the foreign judgment and pursuant to Mexican national law.

Mexico recognises the application of judgments issued under foreign law based upon the following guidelines:

1. the foreign law will be applied as the respective foreign judge would apply it, for which purpose the judge may obtain the necessary information on the text, validity, meaning and legal scope of such law;
2. the foreign substantive law shall be applied except when, given the circumstances of the case, it is necessary to take into account on an exceptional basis the conflicting rules of that law, which make the substantive rules of the State or of a third State applicable;
3. it shall not be an impediment to the application of the foreign law that the law of the State does not provide for institutions or procedures essential to the applicable foreign institution, if analogous institutions or procedures exist;
4. preliminary or incidental questions which may arise in connection with a principal question shall not necessarily be resolved in accordance with the law governing the latter; and
5. when various aspects of the same legal relationship are regulated by different laws, these shall be applied harmoniously, endeavouring to achieve the purposes pursued by each of them.

In Mexico there is no list or catalog of judgments that cannot be enforced; therefore, each enforcement of a foreign judgment must be analyzed individually and may be enforced as long as it is not contrary to Mexican domestic law. Although punitive damages are not legislated in Mexican law, there is no contradiction with domestic law, so the court may have no problem to proceed with its enforcement in terms of the foreign judgment.

No, the foreign judgement must be final to proceed to its execution.

Yes. The appeal will only be admissible if the foreign  judgement contravenes Mexican domestic law.

Yes, as long as it has been ruled so in the foreign resolution and to the extent set forth therein that does not contravene Mexican domestic law.

No, execution in foreign currency is possible.

Yes, as long as it has been so resolved in the foreign judgment.

Yes, there is no restriction for third parties to finance the enforcement of foreign judgments in Mexican territory. The ancillary proceeding for homologation of a foreign judgment may be initiated by the executing party or through a legal representative with sufficient authority to do so.

The criteria homologation by the various jurisdictional authorities regarding the enforcement of foreign judgments. Although it is true that there is already a process recognized by law, it is also true that, to this date, not all authorities follow the same process, interpreting the legal provisions in different ways.

Yes, it has been ratified and, for reference, published in the Federal Official Gazette on October 1^st, 2015.

No, we expect it to be ratified in the following years.