Amparo dismissed as untimely: evidence to reverse it is admissible on appeal
Evidence in the appeal for review. It is admissible when the ruling dismissing the case is challenged and its purpose is to rebut the dismissal, even if issued at the constitutional hearing (inapplicability of article 93, section VII, of the Amparo Law).
Official heading (Spanish): PRUEBAS EN EL RECURSO DE REVISIÓN. PROCEDE SU ADMISIÓN CUANDO SE IMPUGNA LA RESOLUCIÓN QUE SOBRESEYÓ EL JUICIO Y SU FINALIDAD ES DESVIRTUAR EL SOBRESEIMIENTO, AUN CUANDO SE HAYA DICTADO EN LA AUDIENCIA CONSTITUCIONAL (INAPLICABILIDAD DEL ARTÍCULO 93, FRACCIÓN VII, DE LA LEY DE AMPARO).
The ruling
A District Court dismissed an amparo at the constitutional hearing as untimely. On appeal, the petitioner offered the filing receipt to prove it was timely. The Collegiate Circuit Court held that, although article 93, section VII, of the Amparo Law only admits evidence against dismissals issued outside the hearing, documents aimed solely at rebutting that ground must be admitted.
Our take
The court sets aside the literal text of article 93 because distinguishing between dismissals inside or outside the hearing has no justification: in both cases the petitioner loses the chance to prove its point. It is a sensible fix to keep a mistake about dates from ending the case. Its scope is narrow: only evidence against the ground for dismissal, not the merits. And it is an isolated precedent. The prudent course is still not to get there: attach to the complaint the records proving the notice date and timeliness, so the judge does not have to infer them.
What to do
- Attach notice records and the deadline calculation to the amparo complaint.
- If dismissed as untimely, offer the filing receipts and documents that rebut it on appeal.
- Limit that evidence to the timeliness issue so it remains admissible.
Details
- Court
- Collegiate Circuit Court
- Type
- Isolated precedent
- Identifier
- I.14o.C.1 K (12a.)
- Digital registry
- 2032346
- Published
- June 26, 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.