The regulation of electronic signatures in Mexico has recently undergone significant changes. On one hand, a legislative amendment (the “Amendment”) to the Mexican General Law on Negotiable Instruments and Credit Transactions (Ley General de Títulos y Operaciones de Crédito, “LGTOC”), published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on March 26th, 2024, explicitly recognized the validity of electronic negotiable instruments (e.g., digital promissory notes and electronic warehouse receipts), acknowledging them with the same legal value as their paper-based counterparts, provided they meet certain requirements.
On the other hand, federal courts in Mexico have issued new isolated precedents confirming the need to use advanced electronic signatures [1] (“FEA”) in order to guarantee the existence, validity, and enforceability of digital promissory notes. These legal provisions and court rulings clarify the applicable regulatory framework and have practical implications for companies and financial institutions that use electronic signatures in their operations.
Relevant Legal Framework
The current legal framework on electronic signatures in Mexico includes various statutes, among them the LGTOC, which most recent Amendment modified its Article 5 and added Article 5 Bis, establishing that negotiable instruments may be issued through electronic, optical, or other technological means, with the same legal force and enforceability as traditional instruments. Article 5 Bis further provides that the legal requirement for a written and signed document is satisfied if the digital document remains complete and available, and its electronic signature can be attributed to the signatory under applicable regulations.
Recent Court Precedents
On October 24th, 2025, the Federation’s Judicial Weekly of the Mexican Supreme Court published two isolated precedents issued by the Second Civil Collegiate Court of the First Circuit (digital registry 2031391) and the Eleventh Civil Collegiate Court of the same circuit (digital registry 2031392), both establishing key interpretations regarding digital promissory notes:
- Validity requirement for the digital promissory note. One court held that a digital promissory note must be signed using a FEA in order to be valid and have the same legal effects as a traditional negotiable instrument. In the case under review, a commercial summary judgment was dismissed because the digital note submitted did not meet the necessary signature authenticity guarantees, as it was not signed with a FEA issued by a certified service provider.
- Formal requirements for the endorsement of a digital promissory note. Another court held that when endorsing a digital promissory note, the endorsement must be included within the data message of the electronic document (signed with a FEA) and meet the legal requirements established, under Article 29 of the LGTOC. The rationale affirms that, as an electronic document, the endorsement must also be signed using a FEA to ensure its integrity and authorship, thus complying with the functional equivalence principle applicable to both the promissory note and its endorsement.
Practical Implications for Companies and Financial Institutions
Implementing these legal changes carries important practical implications for individuals or legal entities engaging in e-commerce and/or electronic contracting. Companies that use electronic documents in their operations (e.g., contracts or digital promissory notes) must ensure that they employ FEA solutions issued by certified providers when dealing with negotiable instruments, such as promissory notes, in order to guarantee their legal validity and enforceability. Likewise, financial institutions that accept or issue digital promissory notes in their transactions will need to adjust their procedures to comply with the required formalities, such as maintaining the data message in a complete and accessible form, collecting the signatory’s FEA, and properly documenting any digital endorsements in line with legal standards.
Failure to comply with these requirements could result in the inability to judicially enforce such instruments, making it essential to update internal policies and document management systems to align with the current legal framework.
It is important to note that in everyday business practice, it is common to use electronic signatures (non-advanced, different from FEA) for routine documents and internal records. Considering the updated legal landscape, our team can provide legal counsel to organizations, both for the implementation of mechanisms to sign promissory notes or other documents using FEA, and for the review of cases that have arisen after the Amendment where nonadvanced electronic signatures were used, with the aim of mitigating legal risks.
[1] An electronic signature with greater safeguards of security and integrity, based on a valid digital certificate issued by a third party; either by a certification service provider authorized by the Ministry of Economy, or by a government entity empowered for such purposes, such as the Tax Administration Service (SAT) for the e.firma (formerly known as FIEL), and the Certified Electronic Signature of the Federal Judiciary (FIREL).
