When an injunction incident is declared moot, the correct remedy is the queja
Queja appeal under article 97, section I, subsection e), of the Amparo Law. It lies against the ruling, issued at the incidental hearing, that declares the suspension incident moot.
Official heading (Spanish): RECURSO DE QUEJA PREVISTO EN EL ARTÍCULO 97, FRACCIÓN I, INCISO E), DE LA LEY DE AMPARO. PROCEDE CONTRA LA RESOLUCIÓN QUE DECLARA SIN MATERIA EL INCIDENTE DE SUSPENSIÓN, DICTADA EN AUDIENCIA INCIDENTAL.
The ruling
Two courts disagreed on which appeal lies against a ruling, issued at the incidental hearing, that declares the suspension incident moot. One favored the queja; the other, the revisión. The SCJN en banc held that the queja under article 97, section I, subsection e), of the Amparo Law applies, because the decision does not address the merits of the suspension but a formal issue.
Our take
This is a ruling on the proper remedy, and in amparo the wrong remedy is often fatal. The SCJN draws a clear line: the revisión covers decisions that grant, deny, modify or revoke the definitive suspension; anything that merely closes the incident on formal grounds goes to queja. Deadlines and reviewing courts differ, so the mistake is costly. In practice, when a judge declares the suspension moot, for example because the main case was resolved or the act ceased to exist, the team must identify the correct appeal and its deadline at once.
What to do
- Update case calendars to treat a 'moot' ruling on suspension as a queja scenario.
- Review pending matters where a revisión was filed against this kind of ruling.
- Train the litigation team on the revisión-versus-queja distinction in suspension incidents.
Details
- Court
- SCJN Plenary
- Type
- Binding precedent (jurisprudencia)
- Identifier
- P./J. 195/2026 (12a.)
- Digital registry
- 2032716
- Published
- October 2, 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.