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
requirements and rights against AI use
May 27, 2026
LFT and LFDA Reform: New Contractual Requirements and Rights Against AI Use in the Entertainment Industry

Regulatory Context On May 14th, 2026, a decree amending the Federal Labor Law (“LFT“) and...

REGISTRATION FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS
May 26, 2026
The Mandatory Digital Registration for Short-Term Rentals Goes Live; Hosts and Technology Platforms must Register by June 21st, 2026

The purpose of this note is to inform you, further to our following client alerts...

road barrier protective systems on highways and urban roads
May 20, 2026
NOM-037-SICT2-2026: “Road Barrier Protective Systems on Highways and Urban Roads” is Published

On May 19th, 2026, Mexico’s Ministry of Infrastructure, Communications and Transportation (“Ministry”) published in the...

cnbv
May 20, 2026
CNBV Issues Administrative Simplification Measures and Restructures Certain Regulatory Filings

On May 18th, 2026, the National Banking and Securities Commission (“CNBV”) published in the Federal...

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.