Last Friday a new ruling of the First Chamber of Mexico’s Supreme Court of Justice was published constituting a mandatory precedent. This criterion determines that lease agreement clauses may be assessed from the perspective of exploitation when there is a disproportion between the economic benefits and the dignity of one of the parties is affected.
Case Law Data
Thesis 1a./J. 65/2025 (11a.). Digital record 2030472. Heading: “LEASE AGREEMENT. JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITIES MAY REVIEW THE CONVENTIONALITY OF ITS CLAUSES TO ASSESS WHETHER THEY LEAD TO THE EXPLOITATION OF ONE PERSON BY ANOTHER.” Direct appeal under review 1954/2020. Rafael González González. November 24, 2021. Unanimous decision of four votes by Norma Lucía Piña Hernández, who concurred with the outcome but issued a separate opinion regarding the reasoning, Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá, who filed a concurring opinion, Jorge Mario Pardo Rebolledo, who concurred whit the outcome but dissented from paragraphs thirty-nine to forty-four, and Ana Margarita Ríos Farjat. Absent: Alfredo Gutiérrez Ortiz Mena. Rapporteur: Ana Margarita Ríos Farjat. Secretaries: Juan Jaime González Varas and Ricardo Martínez Herrera.
Case Background
A tenant was ordered to pay overdue rent, default interest, and a stipulated penalty following the termination of a lease agreement. Disagreeing with the ruling, he filed an amparo lawsuit, arguing that the late agreed default interest and penalty were excessive, amounting to exploitation and usury.
The Collegiate Court partially granted the amparo, instructing the appellate court to assess whether the default interest was usurious; however, it did not examine whether the stipulated penalty constituted exploitation. Due to this omission, the aggrieved party filed a motion for review.
Legal Precedent Published by the National Supreme Court
The First Chamber ruled that lease agreements may be examined to determine whether they involve economic exploitation, in accordance to Article 21.3 of the American Convention on Human Rights. This provision prohibits usury and any form of patrimonial abuse that undermines human dignity.
The distinction between usury and exploitation lies in their nature: usury arises when excessive interest is imposed on a loan transaction, while exploitation occurs in a contractual relationship marked by a clear economic imbalance that undermines the dignity of one of the parties.
Legal Effects of the Case Law Issued by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
When a ruling issued by the Supreme Court constitutes a mandatory precedent (case law), it must be applied in future cases. Courts are required to consider this new standard when analyzing the validity of contractual clauses and determining whether economic exploitation exists. This may have an impact on the drafting of lease agreements and other legal agreements, preventing one party from imposing excessive conditions on the other.
Questions and Comments
If you have any questions, or would like more detailed information, or need to review contracts to anticipate possible implications arising from this case law, our Dispute Resolution Practice is fully prepared to provide strategic support. Our team will assist you in evaluating the matter and will propose tailored legal solutions aligned with your organization’s objectives and needs.
