Provisional suspension: no new evidence in the queja
Complaint appeal (recurso de queja). Evidence beyond what the amparo judge considered, or should have considered, when ruling on provisional suspension is inadmissible [article 97, section I, subsection b), of the Amparo Law].
Official heading (Spanish): RECURSO DE QUEJA. ES IMPROCEDENTE LA ADMISIÓN DE PRUEBAS ADICIONALES A LAS QUE LA PERSONA JUZGADORA DE AMPARO TOMÓ O DEBIÓ TOMAR EN CONSIDERACIÓN AL RESOLVER SOBRE LA SUSPENSIÓN PROVISIONAL [ARTÍCULO 97, FRACCIÓN I, INCISO B), DE LA LEY DE AMPARO].
The ruling
The complainant filed a queja against the denial of provisional suspension and offered documents the District Court had not seen. The Collegiate Circuit Court held that, under articles 75, 101, 138 and 139 of the Amparo Law, the queja is decided on the record below, so it neither admitted nor weighed the additional evidence.
Our take
The queja is not a second chance to prove your case. In amparo against tax assessments, attachments or business closures, provisional suspension is won or lost on what is attached to the complaint. In our experience, filing fast and completing documents later is common; this precedent punishes that habit. The nuance lies in “or should have considered”: evidence already on the record that the judge ignored may still be invoked in the queja. Build the suspension file before filing the complaint.
What to do
- Attach all suspension evidence to the complaint: the challenged act, standing, harm and available security.
- If the judge ignored evidence already on the record, say so expressly in the queja.
- Save evidence unavailable at filing for the incidental hearing on definitive suspension.
Details
- Court
- Tribunales Colegiados de Circuito
- Type
- Isolated precedent
- Identifier
- V.4o.P.A.2 K (12a.)
- Digital registry
- 2032818
- Published
- October 23, 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.