On appeal of a denied injunction, the Circuit Court may weigh newly arisen evidence
Appeal (revisión) in the suspension incident in indirect amparo against the interlocutory ruling denying the definitive suspension. Exceptionally, the Collegiate Circuit Court may assess and rule on supervening evidence.
Official heading (Spanish): REVISIÓN EN EL INCIDENTE DE SUSPENSIÓN EN AMPARO INDIRECTO CONTRA LA SENTENCIA INTERLOCUTORIA QUE NIEGA LA SUSPENSIÓN DEFINITIVA. EXCEPCIONALMENTE EL TRIBUNAL COLEGIADO DE CIRCUITO PUEDE VALORAR Y PRONUNCIARSE RESPECTO DE PRUEBAS SUPERVENIENTES.
The ruling
A bank sought a definitive suspension against an administrative registry appeal so that it would not be decided without the bank being heard. The District Court denied it. On review, the Collegiate Circuit Court held that it may, exceptionally, weigh supervening facts and evidence to modify or reverse the denial, rather than sending the case back to the trial judge.
Our take
This ruling saves time where it matters most: interim relief. If new facts emerge after the interlocutory ruling, there is no longer a strict need to return to the District Court with a modification request under article 154 of the Amparo Law; they can be put directly to the Circuit Court hearing the appeal. The key word is 'exceptionally'. This is not an open second evidentiary stage, and the court will decide case by case. Evidence should be filed with a clear explanation of why it is supervening and why waiting for the trial judge would cause concrete harm.
What to do
- Record the date each new fact arises to prove it is supervening.
- State in the filing the specific harm that remanding to the District Court would cause.
- Consider a parallel modification request before the trial judge as a fallback.
Details
- Court
- Collegiate Circuit Court
- Type
- Isolated precedent
- Identifier
- VI.3o.A.2 K (12a.)
- Digital registry
- 2032063
- Published
- April 24, 2026
- Area
- Amparo and constitutional
- View official source ↗
Does this ruling affect your company? Let’s talk.
Schedule a conversationOther precedents in the same area
Prepared by Artegia for information only; not legal advice. Headings in English are unofficial translations. The official text is the one published in the Semanario Judicial de la Federación or the TFJA journal.