{"id":1541,"date":"2023-11-24T19:39:29","date_gmt":"2023-11-24T19:39:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/?p=1541"},"modified":"2025-12-23T17:21:14","modified_gmt":"2025-12-23T17:21:14","slug":"relevant-criteria-published-by-the-supreme-court-of-justice-of-the-nation-in-the-judicial-weekly-of-the-federation-on-november-24th-2023","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/relevant-criteria-published-by-the-supreme-court-of-justice-of-the-nation-in-the-judicial-weekly-of-the-federation-on-november-24th-2023\/","title":{"rendered":"Relevant Criteria Published by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, in the Judicial Weekly of the Federation on November 24th, 2023"},"content":{"rendered":"<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\">In Administrative Matters<\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Regional Plenum in Administrative Matters of the Central-North Region with residence in Mexico City resolved that it is within the competence of the District Courts in Administrative Matters to resolve amparos in which the claimed act is the omission by an authority to respond to a written petition requested under Article 8 of our constitution.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A legal precedent was issued in which it was determined that the administrative authority must refrain from sanctioning a public employee when they fail to submit their financial disclosure within the established period, as such omission constitutes a non-serious correctable offense when the disclosure is subsequently submitted spontaneously.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8220;Digital Record: 2027681<br \/>\nInstance: Regional Plenaries<br \/>\nEleventh Epoch<br \/>\nSubject(s): Common, Administrative<br \/>\nThesis: PR.A.CN. J\/28 A (11th)<br \/>\nSource: Judicial Weekly Gazette of the Federation<br \/>\nType: Precedent<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">JURISDICTION TO HEAR INDIRECT AMPARO WHEN CLAIMING FAILURE TO RESPOND TO A PETITION SUBMITTED TO THE GENERAL SECRETARY OR HEAD OF THE TRANSPARENCY UNIT, BOTH OF THE NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS OF THE MEXICAN POSTAL SERVICE &#8220;CORREOS DE M\u00c9XICO.&#8221; IT BELONGS TO THE DISTRICT COURTS IN ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8220;Digital Record: 2027704<br \/>\nInstance: Regional Plenaries<br \/>\nEleventh Epoch<br \/>\nSubject(s): Administrative<br \/>\nThesis: PR.A.CN. J\/34 A (11th)<br \/>\nSource: Judicial Weekly Gazette of the Federation<br \/>\nType: Precedent<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES. THE RULE SET FORTH IN ARTICLE 101, FRACTION II, OF THE GENERAL LAW ON THE SUBJECT, WHICH DIRECTS THE ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY TO REFRAIN FROM SANCTIONING, APPLIES WHEN A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE SUBMITS THEIR FINANCIAL AND INTEREST DECLARATION BELATEDLY BUT SPONTANEOUSLY.&#8221;<\/p>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\">In Constitutional Matters<\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Regional Plenum in Criminal Matters of the Central-North Region, based in Mexico City, ruled that the incompetence of a district court to hear an indirect amparo lawsuit is not sufficient merely by basing it on being named as the responsible authority, rather a specific procedure must be followed to determine whether the district court issued the claimed act or not, thereby establishing its jurisdiction.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Furthermore, a legal precedent was issued determining that indirect amparo is not admissible against the resolution declaring the exception of connexity of the cause well-founded. It is deemed inappropriate to apply and\/or interpret extensively Article 107, Section VIII of the Amparo Law, which allows for the possibility of filing amparo against rulings of incompetence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8220;Digital Record: 2027684<br \/>\nInstance: Regional Plenaries<br \/>\nEleventh Epoch<br \/>\nSubject(s): Common, Criminal<br \/>\nThesis: PR.P.CN. J\/19 K (11th)<br \/>\nSource: Judicial Weekly Gazette of the Federation<br \/>\nType: Precedent<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">NONEXISTENT JURISDICTIONAL CONFLICT. PROCEDURAL PATH TO FOLLOW WHEN A DISTRICT JUDGE BASES THEIR DETERMINATION OF INCOMPETENCE ON HAVING BEEN NAMED, AMONG OTHERS, AS THE RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY, AND THE CLAIMED ACT IS NOT CLEARLY SPECIFIED.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8220;Digital Record: 2027693<br \/>\nInstance: Regional Plenaries<br \/>\nEleventh Epoch<br \/>\nSubject(s): Common, Civil<br \/>\nThesis: PR.C.CS. J\/16 C (11th)<br \/>\nSource: Judicial Weekly Gazette of the Federation<br \/>\nType: Precedent<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">INDIRECT AMPARO PROCEEDINGS. INADMISSIBLE AGAINST THE RESOLUTION DECLARING THE EXCEPTION OF CONNEXITY OF THE CAUSE WELL-FOUNDED (INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 107, SECTION VIII, OF THE AMPARO LAW).&#8221;<\/p>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\">In Labor Matters<\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A legal precedent was issued establishing the obligation of court clerks to include in the case file a copy of the notification certificate delivered to the person with whom the summons procedure was conducted. This is done independently of the raised actuarial justification, ensuring the defendant&#8217;s right to defense.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">&#8220;Digital Record: 2027686<br \/>\nInstance: Regional Plenaries<br \/>\nEleventh Epoch<br \/>\nSubject(s): Labor<br \/>\nThesis: PR.L.CS. J\/48 L (11th)<br \/>\nSource: Judicial Weekly Gazette of the Federation<br \/>\nType: Precedent<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">SUMMONS IN LABOR LAWSUIT. TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH THE OBLIGATION OF THE ACTING PERSON TO DELIVER THE NOTIFICATION CERTIFICATE TO THE PERSON WITH WHOM THE RESPECTIVE PROCEDURE IS CONDUCTED, A COPY OF IT MUST BE ADDED TO THE CASE FILE.&#8221;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In Administrative Matters The Regional Plenum in Administrative Matters of the Central-North Region with residence in Mexico City resolved that it is within the competence of the District Courts in Administrative Matters to resolve amparos in which the claimed act is the omission by an authority to respond to a written petition requested under Article [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":1796,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1541","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-otros"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1541","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1541"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1541\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2566,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1541\/revisions\/2566"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1796"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1541"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1541"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ibarrapg.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1541"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}