Carlos Ibarra

Binding Precedent on Foreign Jurisdiction Clauses in Adhesion Contracts: Protective Position of the Supreme Court towards Consumers in Mexico

On June 6th, 2025, the First Chamber of Mexico’s Supreme Court of Justice issued binding precedent No.1a./J. 93/2025 (11th Era) addressing the enforceability of foreign jurisdiction submission clauses under adhesion contracts, particularly those offered by companies providing services in Mexico through online platforms.

The Supreme Court ruled that this type of provision is invalid and unconstitutional when used in adhesion contracts, particularly those involving consumers located in Mexico. This is because it unreasonably burdens access to domestic courts and undermines procedural equality between the parties.

This decision applies as a binding precedent starting June 9th, 2025, and reflects an increasingly protective stance by Mexican courts towards consumers in digital and service-related contexts.

Practical Implications for Timeshare and Vacation Product Agreements

This precedent could have significant consequences for adhesion contracts entered into with Mexican consumers in connection with tourism-related services, such as timeshare agreements, vacation memberships or similar products.

It is common for such agreements to include:

  • Clauses submitting all disputes to courts located in the United States (e.g., Florida or California);
  • Binding arbitration clauses governed by foreign institutions or subject to foreign law; and/or
  • Waivers to Mexican jurisdiction, even when the consumer is a Mexican citizen and the transaction takes place in Mexico.

 

In light of the recent ruling, these types of provisions could now be challenged by consumers as unconstitutional, even if they were previously accepted in practice or even registered with Mexico’s Consumer Protection Agency (PROFECO).

This is especially relevant where such contracts are registered as adhesion contracts before Mexico’s Consumer Protection Agency (PROFECO), or where they are subject to the requirements of Mexican Official Standard NOM-029-SE-2021 (Timeshare NOM), which reinforces consumer protections consistent with the Court’s findings.

Recommendations

We recommend that companies offering timeshare, vacation club, or similar services in Mexico take this opportunity to:

  • Review their current adhesion contracts to identify any foreign jurisdiction clauses or arbitration provisions that could be deemed unenforceable;
  • Consider adapting or replacing such clauses with jurisdictional frameworks that respect Mexican consumer rights; and
  • Anticipate potential litigation risks and regulatory challenges if such clauses are enforced against Mexican consumers.

Post Tags :

Share :

Read More

Recent News
June 11, 2026
Mexico’s Patent and Trademark Office (IMPI) Suspends Operations and Deadlines on June 11th, 2026, Ahead of the FIFATM World Cup Opening

Regulatory Context On June 10th, 2026, the Federal Official Gazette published a resolution issued by...

June 11, 2026
Workplace Arrangements for June 11th, 2026: Scope of the World Cup Decree

Regulatory Context On June 9th, 2026, the Federal Executive published a Decree in the Official...

June 11, 2026
UIF and CNBV Issue Joint Alert on Money Laundering and Human Trafficking Risks Related to the 2026 FIFATM World Cup

The National Banking and Securities Commission (“CNBV”) and the Financial Intelligence Unit (“UIF”) have issued...

Mexico Opens New Visa Path
June 1, 2026
Mexico Opens New Visa Path for Highly Specialized Foreign Talent

On May 15th, 2026, Mexico’s Ministry of the Interior (SEGOB) and the Ministry of Foreign...

Written by:

Partner

Carlos is Founder and Partner at Ibarra del Paso Gallego, where he specializes in Real…

We use our own and third-party cookies to optimize our website and services. Check our Privacy Notice for more information.