Labor judges may also warn employers whose counsel is plainly incompetent
Manifest and systematic technical incompetence of a party's legal representative in labor proceedings. Article 685 Bis of the Federal Labor Law empowers the judge, upon noticing it, to require the party to appoint another, without distinguishing between worker and employer.
Official heading (Spanish): MANIFIESTA Y SISTEMÁTICA INCAPACIDAD TÉCNICA DEL APODERADO LEGAL DE ALGUNA DE LAS PARTES EN EL PROCEDIMIENTO LABORAL. EL ARTÍCULO 685 BIS DE LA LEY FEDERAL DEL TRABAJO DOTA DE FACULTADES A LA PERSONA JUZGADORA PARA QUE EN LOS CASOS EN QUE LA ADVIERTA, LAS PREVENGA PARA QUE DESIGNEN OTRO, SIN DISTINGUIR SI SE TRATA DE LA PARTE TRABAJADORA O DE LA PATRONAL.
The ruling
An employer that lost a labor case argued in a direct amparo that the court should have required it to replace its counsel, given the obvious technical incompetence of the answer. The Collegiate Circuit Court held that article 685 Bis of the Federal Labor Law allows the judge to warn either party, worker or employer, when counsel shows manifest and systematic technical incompetence.
Our take
The power applies to both sides, but it should not be read as a safety net. The ruling itself notes that whether a defense is adequate is assessed at the preliminary hearing or in the judgment, not when the answer is filed; a weak defense alone does not trigger the warning. In practice, an employer will rarely win an amparo by arguing its lawyer did a poor job. The lesson runs the other way: the quality of counsel is the company's responsibility. We recommend reviewing who handles labor cases, under what supervision and to what drafting standards.
What to do
- Audit the quality of answers filed by the company's outside labor counsel.
- Set up internal review of defenses and evidence before each answer is filed.
- Confirm every representative is a licensed attorney with a professional license, as article 685 Bis requires.
Details
- Court
- Collegiate Circuit Court
- Type
- Isolated precedent
- Identifier
- VII.2o.T.11 L (12a.)
- Digital registry
- 2032169
- Published
- May 22, 2026
- Area
- Labor and social security
- 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.