{"id":141686,"date":"2026-06-10T09:48:28","date_gmt":"2026-06-10T09:48:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=comparative_guide&#038;p=141686"},"modified":"2026-06-10T11:17:47","modified_gmt":"2026-06-10T11:17:47","slug":"mexico-class-actions","status":"publish","type":"comparative_guide","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/chapter\/mexico-class-actions\/","title":{"rendered":"Mexico: Class Actions"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-141686","comparative_guide","type-comparative_guide","status-publish","hentry","guides-class-actions","jurisdictions-mexico"],"acf":[],"appp":{"post_list":{"below_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">De la Garza y Acosta<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2025\/05\/DLGA-logo.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>"},"post_detail":{"above_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">De la Garza y Acosta<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2025\/05\/DLGA-logo.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>","below_title":"<span class=\"guide-intro\">This country specific Q&amp;A provides an overview of Class Actions laws and regulations applicable in Mexico<\/span><div class=\"guide-content\"><div class=\"filter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t<input type=\"text\" placeholder=\"Search questions and answers...\" class=\"filter-container__search-field\">\r\n\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<ol class=\"custom-counter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does your jurisdiction have a class action or collective redress mechanism? If so, please describe the mechanism(s) and outline the principal sources of law and regulation and its overarching impact on the conduct of class actions in your jurisdiction.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In Mexico, individuals whose rights and interests have been affected in the context of the consumption of private or public goods and services, environmental matters, or competition law issues may pursue collective actions. Article 17 of the Mexican Constitution provides for this possibility, aiming to ensure effective access to justice and to strengthen claimants&#8217; bargaining power by enabling them to act collectively against corporate entities.<\/p>\n<p>The procedural regulation of collective actions is contained in the Federal Code of Civil Procedure (\u201cFCCP\u201d). However, by no later than 1 April 2027, the provisions of the National Code of Civil and Family Procedure (\u201cNCCFP\u201d) will come into force, unless the Federal Congress declares an earlier date of effectiveness as per the Second Transitory Article of the Decree enacting the NCCFP. Consequently, this response refers to the relevant provisions of both legal codes to ensure up-to-date coverage.<\/p>\n<p>The applicable substantive law for collective actions depends on the subject matter of the claim \u2014 be it environmental, civil, or economic competition law.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, the procedural rules governing collective actions in Mexico impose an excessive burden of requirements, which renders their access particularly challenging.<\/p>\n<p>For instance, under Article 591 of the FCCP, the admission of a collective action claim is only granted following a preliminary phase of pleadings between the parties \u2014 an onerous prerequisite that discourages claimants from initiating such actions despite their constitutional entitlement. Fortunately, this preliminary stage has been eliminated under the new NCCFP.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the history of the development of the class actions\/collective redress mechanism and its policy basis in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The legal basis for collective actions dates back to 29 July 2010, when a constitutional reform to Article 17 was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation (\u201cOGF\u201d), introducing a fourth paragraph that mandates the Federal Congress to enact legislation governing collective actions.<\/p>\n<p>The explanatory memorandum dated 7 February 2008 leading to this constitutional amendment noted the need to move away from an individualistic approach to procedural law and to incorporate group actions, which had already proven effective in comparative legal systems.<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, on 30 August 2011, the reform to the FCCP was published in the OGF. This reform introduced the regime for collective actions in \u201cBook Five \u2013 On Collective Actions\u201d, encompassing Articles 578 to 626.<br \/>\nHowever, it must be noted that collective actions were not formally incorporated into the Mexican legal system until 2011. Prior to this, some scholars argue that their origins can be traced to the agrarian law sector in the 1960s, and certain provisions in the Federal Consumer Protection Law of 1992, although the latter were seldom applied in practice.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the frequency of class actions brought in your jurisdiction (divided by type of claim, as applicable), in terms of number of cases over the years and\/or comparison to other types of litigation?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Although precise figures are unavailable, it is estimated that around 25 collective actions were filed in Mexico in 2024. This estimate derives from a search conducted through the rulings search engine then administered by the Federal Judiciary Council, whose administrative functions are now performed by the Judicial Administration Body. By contrast, according to statistics published by the Federal Judiciary Council, 669 civil proceedings per 100,000 inhabitants were filed in the same year before Federal District Courts. As such, collective actions remain rarely utilised within the Mexican legal system.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there certain courts or types of claims that are most prevalent (for example competition vs commercial litigation generally)?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The most frequent collective actions pertain to consumer disputes involving standard-form contracts, which fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of Federal District Courts, as provided in the recently enacted Organic Law of the Federal Judiciary (\u201cOLFJ\u201d), published in the OGF on 20 December 2024.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Federal Consumer Protection Agency (\u201cPROFECO\u201d), its active and enforcement-stage collective actions mainly relate to disputes involving housing sales, travel services, medical products, and electronic fuel equipment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the definition of 'class action' or 'collective redress' relevant to your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Pursuant to Articles 579 and 580 of the FCCP, or Articles 855 and 856 of the NCCFP, a collective action is a procedural mechanism for the protection of diffuse or collective rights and interests, or individual rights with collective relevance.<\/p>\n<p>Diffuse and collective rights are indivisible in nature and pertain to an indeterminate or determinable group linked by common factual or legal circumstances.<\/p>\n<p>Conversely, individual rights of collective relevance are divisible, belonging to identifiable individuals within a group, connected through shared legal characteristics.<\/p>\n<p>In simplified terms, a collective action is a legal vehicle that allows the aggregation of claims arising from common circumstances into a single proceeding, in pursuit of judicial redress.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the general 'triggers' for commencement of a class action or collective redress in your jurisdiction from a factual perspective?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The usual factual trigger for the commencement of a collective action is the existence or discovery of harm affecting a group within the spheres of consumer rights, environmental protection, or competition law.<\/p>\n<p>From a practical standpoint, common triggers include: mass consumer harm arising from the same standard-form contract, product defect, misleading practice, cancellation of services or deficient service; environmental contamination or deterioration; and harm derived from unlawful concentrations or monopolistic practices declared by final administrative decision.<\/p>\n<p>The former First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (\u201cSCJN\u201d) defined consumer relations as economic transactions of a commercial or financial nature between parties on an equal footing, arising within the dynamics of market economies.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the SCJN has ruled that such relations entail a legal bond between a provider of goods or services and a final consumer or user, grounded in reciprocal obligations. This includes pre-contractual acts that may influence purchasing decisions or service engagements.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How do class actions or collective redress proceedings typically interact with regulatory enforcement findings? e.g. competition, environmental or financial regulators?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Collective actions often interact with regulatory enforcement findings because administrative investigations may identify public harm or unlawful conduct that later serves as the factual and legal basis for a collective action. In competition matters, this interaction is particularly important because harm resulting from unlawful concentrations or monopolistic practices must be based on a final resolution issued by the competent competition authority.<\/p>\n<p>The institutional framework changed materially after the constitutional reform in matters of organic simplification. A decree published in the OGF on 20 December 2024 amended Article 28 of the Federal Constitution and provided for the extinction of several autonomous bodies, including the Federal Economic Competition Commission (\u201cCOFECE\u201d) and the Federal Telecommunications Institute (\u201cIFT\u201d).<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, the reform to the Federal Economic Competition Law published in the OGF on 16 July 2025 created the National Antitrust Commission (\u201cCNA\u201d). Under the transitory regime of that reform, once the CNA\u2019s Board was integrated, any reference in federal or local legislation to COFECE must be understood as a reference to the CNA. The CNA also substituted the IFT in ongoing matters concerning competition, preponderance and cross-ownership.<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly, while the FCCP and the NCCFP still contain references to COFECE and the IFT, such references should now be read in light of the 2025 transition to the CNA. Final decisions issued by COFECE or the IFT before the transition continue to have legal effects, whereas future competition-related collective redress should be analysed by reference to the CNA.<\/p>\n<p>In all events, a regulatory finding does not automatically determine the outcome of the collective action. The court hearing the collective claim must still decide whether the alleged damages are attributable to the infringement and whether the claimant satisfies the relevant standing, causation and procedural requirements.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What types of conduct and causes of action can be relied upon as the basis for a class action or collective redress mechanism?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Although there is no exhaustive statutory list, based on the requirements for establishing standing under Article 588(I) of the FCCP or Article 865(I) of the NCCFP, the causes of action in collective claims typically include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Acts or omissions that harm consumers or users of goods or services;<\/li>\n<li>Environmental damage;<\/li>\n<li>Harm resulting from unlawful concentrations or monopolistic practices as confirmed by final resolutions issued by the competent competition authority. Although the FCCP and NCCFP still refer to COFECE and the IFT, such references should be read in light of the 2025 transition to the CNA.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any limitations of types of claims that may be brought on a collective basis?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Mexican law recognises the following categories of collective actions for the protection of group rights or interests:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Diffuse Actions: These are indivisible in nature and aim to protect an indeterminate group. The remedy sought is the restitution in kind, or alternatively, compensatory damages<\/li>\n<li>Strict Collective Actions: Also indivisible, but pertaining to a determinate or determinable group linked by a specific legal relationship. The objective is individualised redress via restitution in kind or, subsidiarily, monetary compensation.<\/li>\n<li>Homogeneous Individual Actions: These are divisible and arise from individual rights of collective relevance that share common characteristics. They typically concern contractual disputes, seeking specific performance or rescission of the contract, along with the corresponding remedies under the applicable law.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Who may bring a class action or collective redress proceeding? (e.g. qualified entities, consumers, companies etc)<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Pursuant to Article 585 of the FCCP, currently in force, the following parties have legal standing to initiate a collective action: (i) PROFECO; (ii) the Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection (\u201cPROFEPA\u201d); (iii) the National Commission for the Protection and Defence of Financial Services Users (\u201cCONDUSEF\u201d); (iv) COFECE, whose statutory references should now be read in light of the 2025 transition to the CNA; (v) a representative of a group comprising at least 30 individuals; (vi) civil associations authorised by the Judicial Administration Body, which replaced the Federal Judiciary Council; and (vii) the Attorney General of the Republic.<\/p>\n<p>Under Article 862 of the NCCFP, the following parties are entitled to bring a collective action: (i) PROFECO; (ii) PROFEPA; (iii) CONDUSEF; (iv) COFECE; (v) IFT, in matters of competition; (vi) a common representative integrating a group of at least 15 individuals; (vii) civil associations authorised by the Judicial Administration Body, which replaced the Federal Judiciary Council; (viii) the Attorney General of the Republic; and (ix) the Federal Institute for Public Defence. The references to COFECE and IFT should be read in light of the 2025 transition to the CNA.<\/p>\n<p>Whilst we commend the work of civil associations that support the causes they engage with, we note the importance of professionalising their oversight by means of objective criteria that enable the Judicial Administration Body to ensure they are suitably qualified to represent collectives from a professional and operational standpoint.<\/p>\n<p>It is imperative to ensure on an ongoing basis that their members possess the requisite knowledge to act on behalf of the association in the actions pursued in line with its purpose; and, naturally, that operational independence is guaranteed, for which purpose it is appropriate to supervise their funding sources and internal measures to prevent conflicts of interest, whether directly or through their members, among other considerations.<\/p>\n<p>The right to proper representation of the collective is entrusted to civil associations, which file the majority of such actions, hence the need for the Judicial Administration Body to ensure their professionalism and operational autonomy.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any limits on the nationality or domicile of claimants in class actions or collective redress proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Mexican law does not expressly provide for any limitations based on the nationality or domicile of the claimants.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any limitations on size or type of class?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Where a group seeks to bring a strict collective action or a homogeneous individual action under the FCCP, it must comprise at least 30 individuals. However, this threshold is reduced to 15 individuals under the new NCCFP.<\/p>\n<p>An illustrative example is found in the non-binding legal opinion with digital registration number 2011868, issued by the Administrative and Civil Collegiate Court based in the State of Coahuila. It held that, in order to activate the action provided for in Article 28 of the Federal Law on Environmental Liability \u2014 which seeks to establish liability for environmental harm and to mandate the reparation and compensation of such harm where applicable \u2014 it is not necessary to have at least 30 affected community members participating, as is required in collective actions.<\/p>\n<p>We concur with this interpretation, given that these are distinct actions despite certain similarities, and imposing restrictive criteria hinders access to justice.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any requirements or prohibitions in sourcing this class?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Among the common requirements that must be demonstrated by the group under Articles 587, sections VI and IX of the FCCP or 864, sections VII and X of the NCCFP are that its members share common ground of fact or law, and that the violated right or interest be clearly identified.<\/p>\n<p>It is also noteworthy that both the group and the authorised civil associations must ensure adequate representation throughout the proceedings. As stated in Article 586 of the FCCP or 863 of the NCCFP, such representation must be diligent and in good faith, avoiding conflicts of interest with those they represent or any record of bad faith litigation.<\/p>\n<p>Authorised civil associations must be registered in the Public Register of Civil Associations administered by the Judicial Administration Body, which replaced the Federal Judiciary Council, in accordance with Articles 619 to 621 of the FCCP or 896 to 898 of the NCCFP. Based on the public registry last reviewed in April 2025, only 11 civil associations were registered in said register.<\/p>\n<p>Complementing the response to Question 10, Articles 622 of the FCCP and 899 of the NCCFP establish that associations must avoid any situation where an associate, member, representative or director may face a conflict of interest in relation to the activities conducted; nonetheless, we reiterate the absence of objective criteria to identify and prevent such conflicts in practice.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Which courts deal with class actions or collective redress proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Currently, Federal District Courts with civil jurisdiction are materially competent to hear collective actions under Article 55 of the OLFJ. Additionally, District Courts with commercial jurisdiction may also hear such actions pursuant to Article 56 of the OLFJ, once the NCCFP\u2019s collective actions regime is in force.<\/p>\n<p>For the sake of judicial efficiency, the jurisdictional rules set out in the OLFJ concerning collective actions should be revised, given that they currently apply to subject matters which are dissimilar \u2014 for example, environmental and competition matters differ significantly in substance.<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly, Articles 30 of the Federal Law on Environmental Liability and 134 of the Federal Economic Competition Law advocate for the establishment of specialised District Courts in environmental law and in economic competition, broadcasting, and telecommunications, respectively.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any jurisdictional obstacles to class actions or collective redress proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>A major challenge for claimants lies in correctly identifying the nature of the collective action brought, as precedent exists whereby claims have been dismissed for lack of such identification. One example is the recent decision by the Sixteenth District Court in the State of Mexico, based in Naucalpan de Ju\u00e1rez, dated 10 January 2024 in case file 1196\/2024 (available in the former Federal Judiciary Council Rulings Search Engine), concerning the cancellation of a music concert. The consumers sought, inter alia, a refund of the sums paid, but the claim was dismissed on the grounds that the facts corresponded to a homogeneous individual action rather than the strict collective action selected by the claimant.<\/p>\n<p>Strict procedural rules concerning standing and causation, along with stringent filing requirements, constitute hurdles to bringing collective actions.<\/p>\n<p>Another obstacle is the practice of serving notice to members of the group via public announcements (edictos), due to the financial burden this may impose, and the lack of service may paralyse the collective action.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does your jurisdiction adopt an \u201copt in\u201d or \u201copt out\u201d mechanism?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The system of collective involvement provided by both the FCCP and the NCCFP is an opt-in model \u2013also referred to as voluntary representation\u2013 meaning that only individuals who have expressly joined the collective action will be bound by the resulting judgment. By contrast, the opt-out system implies that all affected individuals are bound by the judgment, except for those who have expressly excluded themselves.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is required (i.e. procedural formalities) in order to start a class action or collective redress claim?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>A claim must be filed in compliance with the requirements of Article 587 of the FCCP or 864 of the NCCFP.<br \/>\nAdditionally, pursuant to Article 588 of the FCCP or 865 of the NCCFP, the claimant must meet the requirements for causal standing, including:<\/p>\n<p>(i) acts causing harm to consumers or users of goods or services, to the environment, or to consumers due to anticompetitive conduct declared by final decision of the competent competition authority;<\/p>\n<p>(ii) common factual or legal issues among the group members;<\/p>\n<p>(iii) a minimum of 30 or 15 group members, depending on whether the FCCP or NCCFP applies; and<\/p>\n<p>(iv) alignment between the subject matter of the action and the harm suffered by the group.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, interpreted in the opposite sense, Article 589 of the FCCP or 866 of the NCCFP requires the claimant to meet the procedural standing criteria, including:<\/p>\n<p>(i) the group has granted consent to participate in a strict or homogeneous individual action;<\/p>\n<p>(ii) the challenged acts do not originate from administrative proceedings conducted as trials or from judicial proceedings (the NCCFP limits this to judicial proceedings only);<\/p>\n<p>(iii) the representation complies with applicable collective action regulations;<\/p>\n<p>(iv) the members of the group are identifiable or identified in strict or homogeneous individual actions, including the common circumstances of the harm; and<\/p>\n<p>(v) a collective action is a suitable means of resolving the dispute.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What other mandatory procedural requirements apply to these types of matters?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Under the FCCP, class actions must be filed within a statutory period of 3 years and 6 months, with the understanding that if they involve immediate damages, the period will be counted from the date the damage occurred, and if they are of a continuous nature, from the last day the event took place.<\/p>\n<p>However, Article 861 of the NCCFP modifies this regime. Once the NCCFP is in force, collective actions will prescribe in 5 years, counted from the day on which the harm was caused. If the harm is continuous, the limitation period will begin to run once the harm ceases; and if the harm continues to be generated, the limitation period will not run. In addition, for collective actions related to monopolistic practices and unlawful concentrations, the NCCFP provides that the limitation period will be suspended upon the commencement of the relevant investigation by the competition authority. References to COFECE and the IFT in this context should be read in light of the 2025 transition to the CNA.<\/p>\n<p>We have not identified precedents or guidelines that resolve the possible uncertainty regarding when the damage is considered to have occurred.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, we find it relevant that a final judgment, if not appealed, will have the effect of res judicata, as stipulated in Article 614 of the FCCP or 891 of the NCCFP.<\/p>\n<p>There is a special regulation for the processing of precautionary measures, whose scope is broader than those applicable in general civil lawsuits, as per Article 611 of the FCCP or 888 of the NCCFP. These measures may relate to acts that involve an imminent and irreparable threat to social interests, the life or health of the community, even extending to situations where national security is considered at risk.<\/p>\n<p>The regime for costs and expenses, as outlined in Articles 616 to 618 of the FCCP or 893 to 895 of the NCCFP, is also special. The guiding principle is that each party assumes its own costs, and regarding the legal fees for the representative of the collective, there is a limitation consisting of the establishment of a tariff distributed as follows:<\/p>\n<p>Principal Amount in Liquid Units of Measurement (\u201cUMA\u2019s\u201d) (equivalent to 2026 value of $117.31 Mexican pesos):<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Up to 200,000 UMA\u2019s: Up to 20%<\/li>\n<li>From 200,001 to 1,999,999 UMA\u2019s: Up to 20% for the first 200,000 UMA\u2019s and 10% for the excess<\/li>\n<li>2,000,000 UMA\u2019s: Up to 11% for the first 2,000,000 UMA\u2019s and 3% for the excess<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Fees are paid between the plaintiff and the administration fund currently managed by the Judicial Administration Body, which replaced the Federal Judiciary Council, as per Article 618 of the FCCP or 895 of the NCCFP.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is also important to highlight that it is not permissible to consolidate an individual action and a collective action when they share the same cause of action, as prohibited by Article 613 of the FCCP or 890 of the NCCFP.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are normal civil procedure rules applied to these proceedings or a special set of rules adopted for this purpose?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Special rules contained in the &#8220;Fifth Book of Collective Actions&#8221; of the FCCP, from Articles 578 to 626, apply. This regulation consists of a unique title developed through eleven chapters corresponding to the following titles:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u00a0\u201cChapter I General Provisions\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cChapter II Active Standing\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cChapter III Procedure<\/li>\n<li>\u00a0\u201cChapter IV Judgments\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cChapter V Precautionary Measures\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cChapter VI Enforcement Measures\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cChapter VII Relationship between Collective Actions and Individual Actions\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cChapter VIII Res Judicata\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cChapter IX Costs and Expenses\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cChapter X Associations\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cChapter XI The Fund\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In the NCCFP, its regulation is included in the &#8220;Sixth Book of Collective Actions&#8221; under a \u201cSingle Chapter General Provisions\u201d with three sections:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>&#8220;Section One Active Standing&#8221;<\/li>\n<li>&#8220;Section Two The Procedure&#8221;<\/li>\n<li>&#8220;Section Three The Judgments&#8221; which corresponds to Articles 855 to 903.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How long do these cases typically run for?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>It is impossible to estimate a specific duration for such actions due to their complexity, the filing of ordinary and extraordinary appeals during their processing, the possibility of requesting precautionary measures, and the right of consumers to join the case \u2014 which remains valid even up to 18 months after the agreement is formalized or the judgment becomes res judicata under Article 594 of the FCCP (which, according to Article 871 of the NCCFP, this period is 2 years). Furthermore, procedural deadlines may be extended by the judge for justified reasons.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, these cases generally take several years.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What remedies are available to claimants in class action or collective redress proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The remedies applicable in a class action judgment can be found in Articles 604 and 605 of the FCCP or 881 and 882 of the NCCFP, and they vary according to the nature of the action.<\/p>\n<p>In the case of a diffuse action, the court can only apply the remedy of damage repair, primarily through restitution in kind, which allows for the defendant to be required to perform or refrain from certain actions. If this is not possible, the repair will be ordered through equivalent compensation for indemnification.<\/p>\n<p>If it is a strict collective action or homogeneous individual action, the remedy corresponds to damage repair through the performance of actions or abstention and covering the damages individually for the members of the collective.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the measure of damages for any financial remedies for class actions or collective redress proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The measure of damages in collective actions depends on the type of collective action brought and on the nature of the right or interest affected.<\/p>\n<p>Under Articles 604 and 605 of the FCCP, or Articles 881 and 882 of the NCCFP, the judgment must specify the manner in which the harm is to be repaired. As a general rule, reparation should primarily be made through restitution in kind, which may require the defendant to perform or refrain from performing certain acts.<\/p>\n<p>In diffuse actions, which protect indivisible rights or interests belonging to an indeterminate group, the primary remedy is the repair of the harm caused to the collective, mainly through restitution in kind. Under the FCCP, if restitution is not possible, the court may order substitute performance and, where applicable, the resulting amount is directed to the fund established for collective actions. The NCCFP, however, frames diffuse-action relief primarily in terms of restitution and additional measures, particularly in environmental and consumer matters.<\/p>\n<p>By contrast, in strict collective actions and homogeneous individual actions, the court may order individualised compensation in favour of the members of the collective. In such cases, each member of the collective must prove the existence and extent of the individual harm suffered, as well as the causal link between that harm and the defendant\u2019s conduct. The NCCFP also allows either individual liquidation incidents or a mass liquidation incident, in which the amount of harm suffered by each member must be proven.<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly, financial remedies in Mexican collective actions are compensatory rather than automatic. The claimant must establish actual harm, causation and attribution to the defendant. Mexican law does not allow overcompensation, and the amount awarded should be limited to repairing the harm effectively caused, without resulting in unjust enrichment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are punitive or exemplary damages available for class actions or collective redress proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, because the regime for extracontractual liability under the Federal Civil Code applies in class actions, and it is possible to claim compensation for moral damage as regulated in Article 1916 bis, to which Mexican jurisprudence added a punitive aspect.<\/p>\n<p>The origin of the jurisprudential doctrine of punitive damages is found in the direct amparo rulings 30\/2013 and its related 31\/2013, issued by the First Chamber of the SCJN.<\/p>\n<p>According to this doctrine, when quantifying compensation for moral damage, various factors related to the infringer must be analyzed, such as their degree of responsibility, including the seriousness of their conduct, the type of risk involved, the degree of negligence, and the social relevance of the act, with the results being weighed according to the available scales of mild, medium, and high.<\/p>\n<p>We briefly express our opposition to the recognition of punitive damages in Mexico, as it relies on indeterminate legal concepts that negatively impact the human right to legal security, which is even more relevant when applying penalties (essentially punitive damages), as well as other constitutional principles. Furthermore, it undermines the civil responsibility function of repairing the actual harm caused to the victim.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is a judge or multiple judges assigned to these cases?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Class actions are decided by the judge in charge of the corresponding District Court, which may change if, during the processing of the case, appeals are filed that require the case to be elevated to the Collegiate Court of Appeals, Circuit Court, or even the SCJN.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are class actions or collective redress proceedings subject to juries?  If so, what is the role of juries?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In Mexico, there is no jury system.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there any prescribed procedural mechanism for the collective settlement of class actions or collective redress proceedings?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, Article 595 of the FCCP or 872 of the NCCFP provides for the holding of a preliminary conciliation hearing in which the judge will propose solutions to the dispute and encourage the parties to resolve it amicably. The judge may even call upon experts to assist if deemed necessary.<\/p>\n<p>It is worth noting that settlements can take place up until the definitive resolution of the case.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there any judicial oversight for settlements of class actions or collective redress mechanisms?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, before approving the parties&#8217; settlement, the judge will review its legality after hearing from the public officials authorized to promote class actions under Article 585 of the FCCP or 862 of the NCCFP and, if necessary, from the members of the collective involved in the settlement.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there any prescribed procedural obligation to undertake alternative dispute resolution (outside of the court system) and, if so, a specified format?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no general statutory obligation to undertake alternative dispute resolution outside the court system before commencing a collective action.<\/p>\n<p>The specific procedural mechanism provided by Article 595 of the FCCP or 872 of the NCCFP is a judicial preliminary conciliation hearing, which takes place within the collective action proceeding. At that hearing, the judge may propose solutions to the dispute, encourage an amicable resolution and, if necessary, call upon experts to assist.<\/p>\n<p>Certain sector-specific matters may involve administrative complaint or conciliation mechanisms before authorities such as PROFECO or CONDUSEF. However, those mechanisms are not established as a general prerequisite for the filing of collective actions, unless the applicable special statute were to provide otherwise in a particular case.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What litigation funding models are available for a class action or collective redress.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Mexico does not have a detailed statutory regime specifically governing litigation funding for class actions or collective redress proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, collective actions may be funded by the public authority with standing to sue, by the representative or members of the collective, by authorised civil associations, or through legal-fee arrangements with counsel, including success-fee components to the extent permitted by general civil, contractual and professional rules.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, the collective action regime contemplates a special fund managed by the Judicial Administration Body, which replaced the Federal Judiciary Council. This fund may be relevant for certain court-approved costs, expenses or amounts arising from collective action proceedings under the FCCP or the NCCFP.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any restrictions on third-party funding of a class action or collective redress.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no express statutory prohibition on third-party funding in collective actions. However, third-party funding is not comprehensively regulated and remains uncommon in practice.<\/p>\n<p>Any funding arrangement should be analysed under the rules on adequate representation, conflicts of interest, good faith and the prohibition on frivolous, speculative or profit-driven use of collective actions. In particular, Articles 586 and 622 of the FCCP, or Articles 863 and 899 of the NCCFP, require representatives and authorised civil associations to avoid conflicts of interest and to act diligently, in good faith and in line with the collective\u2019s interest.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, while third-party funding is not expressly barred, it should not compromise the independence of the representative, the control of the litigation, the fairness of any settlement, or the protection of the collective\u2019s interests.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the top three emerging business risks that are the focus of class action or collective redress litigation?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The top three emerging business risks are: (i) the release of defective products and the provision of deficient services, particularly in mass consumer and e-commerce relationships; (ii) industrial, infrastructure and transformation activities that may cause environmental harm or trigger sustainability-related claims; and (iii) commercial practices affecting consumers in the context of economic competition, including unlawful concentrations, monopolistic practices or coordinated conduct affecting prices, supply or market access.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What trends in litigation are evident in the last three years in your jurisdiction in respect of class actions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In October 2024, it was reported that COFECE initiated a class action for price-fixing and manipulation in the distribution of medicines. In light of the 2025 reform, this matter should now be understood in the context of the transition from COFECE to the CNA.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, in recent years, there has been an increase in class actions related to environmental damage linked to climate change, environmental pollution, and other similar cases.<\/p>\n<p>Another area that may become increasingly relevant concerns consumer-facing claims arising from digital and e-commerce transactions, including mass cancellations, non-delivery of products, standard-form terms and deficient online services.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Where do you foresee the most significant legal development in the next 12 months in respect of collective redress and class actions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The most significant legal development in the next 12 months will likely be the gradual implementation of the NCCFP\u2019s collective action regime ahead of the ultimate nationwide deadline of 1 April 2027.<\/p>\n<p>This new regime is relevant because it eliminates the preliminary pleadings stage currently required under Article 591 of the FCCP before admission of the claim, reduces the minimum number of members required for strict collective and homogeneous individual actions from 30 to 15, extends the period for members to join after judgment, and improves the notice system to the collective.<\/p>\n<p>A second relevant development will be the consolidation of the CNA as the successor authority to COFECE, and to the IFT in competition-related matters, which may influence competition-based collective actions.<\/p>\n<p>From a business-risk perspective, we also expect collective claims to continue developing around mass consumer relationships, particularly financial, technological and digital services.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are class actions or collective redress proceedings being brought for \u2018ESG\u2019 matters? If so, how are those claims being framed?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In environmental matters, a notable class action was initiated by the Collective of Holders of the Human Right to a Healthy Environment for Development and Well-being of People, against various federal environmental authorities and permit holders for damages caused by the release of genetically modified maize organisms into the environment.<\/p>\n<p>This case reached the First Chamber of the SCJN twice, the most recent of which led to the issuance of Amparo Judgment in Review 1023\/2019, confirming the imposition of precautionary measures in the collective action, preceded by an interesting analysis on the constitutionality of Articles 585, 610 and 611, among others, of the Federal Code of Civil Procedure.<\/p>\n<p>In governance matters, the class action promoted by COFECE against three pharmaceutical distributors for damages allegedly caused to the public through price-fixing and manipulation in the distribution of medicines remains relevant. Following the 2025 reform to the Federal Economic Competition Law, this matter should now be analysed in light of the transition from COFECE to the CNA.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any proposals for the reform of class actions or collective redress proceedings? If so, what are those proposals?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The NCCFP, which came into effect on 8 June 2023, foresees a regime for class actions that will become applicable nationwide no later than 1 April 2027.<\/p>\n<p>Among the new features of this regulation, we highlight that the statutory text of Article 862 of the NCCFP refers to both COFECE and the IFT in competition matters; however, following the 2025 reform to the Federal Economic Competition Law, those references must be read in light of the transition to the CNA.<\/p>\n<p>We also celebrate the removal of the process of submissions between interested parties, as provided for in Article 591 of the FCCP, as a decisive requirement to reach the stage of issuing the order admitting the claim.<\/p>\n<p>The number of individuals in the legitimised collective to promote a class action has been reduced from 30 to 15, and the period for joining after the final resolution of the action has been extended from 18 months to 2 years, among other relevant aspects.<\/p>\n<p>And, very importantly, the improvement of the notification system to be carried out to the members of the collective during the course of the class action. Under the FCCP regulation, the possibility of ordering notifications through the publication of edicts was costly and hindered its progress or, simply, discouraged the promotion of such actions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\r\n<div class=\"word-count-hidden\" style=\"display:none;\">Estimated word count: <span class=\"word-count\">5935<\/span><\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<\/ol>\r\n\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/wp-content\/themes\/twentyseventeen\/src\/jquery\/components\/filter-guides.js\" async><\/script><\/div>"}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide\/141686","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/comparative_guide"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=141686"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}