Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

Conflict of Laws in Mexico

April 8, 2007/in /by Martin George
image_pdfimage_print

Jorge A. Vargas (University of San Diego – School of Law) has posted “Conflict of Laws in Mexico as Governed By the Rules of the Federal Code of Civil Procedure.” Here’s the abstract:

Since NAFTA entered into force in 1994, international litigation between the United States and Mexico has grown- and continues to grow-exponentially. In recent years, the application of foreign law in California and Texas has become equivalent to Mexican law, and soon other states will follow suit, including Arizona, New Mexico, Florida and Illinois.

Prior to 1988, the Mexican legal system was not legally equipped to consider the application of foreign law in that country. In other words, until that year, only Mexican law was applied by Mexican judges in Mexican courts. At the same time, Mexico’s legal system virtually lacked legal provision in its codes and statutes that allowed for the conduct of certain procedural acts requested by foreign judges (i.e., American judges) such as serving summons, taking evidence, recording depositions and enforcing judgments in that country. However, all of this changed in 1988 when President Miguel de la Madrid made the necessary legislative amendments both to the Federal Civil Code and to the Federal Code of Civil Procedure with the addition of Book Four titled: International Procedural Cooperation.

This article discusses in detail the principles and rules governing the conduct of International Judicial Cooperation between Mexico and other countries, notably the United States, involving service of summons, taking of evidence, and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards by means of letters rogatory with the assistance of Mexico’s Central Authority (i.e., Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores (SRE) or Secretariat of Foreign Affairs) or that of the members of Mexico’s consular service. These principles and rules are found in Articles 543-577 of Mexico’s Federal Code of Civil Procedure.

Download the article from here.

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Martin George https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Martin George2007-04-08 16:38:562007-04-08 16:38:57Conflict of Laws in Mexico

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
  • The AIFC Court, Gazprom v Naftogaz and the Emergence of a New Conduit Jurisdiction Debate June 6, 2026
  • Montana Supreme Court Decides International Child Custody Case June 3, 2026
  • China’s Countering Improper Foreign Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regulation Blocked EU’s Extraterritorial Data Acquisition May 29, 2026
Link to: Exclusive Jurisdiction, Cross-Border IP Infringement and the Brussels I Regulation Link to: Exclusive Jurisdiction, Cross-Border IP Infringement and the Brussels I Regulation Exclusive Jurisdiction, Cross-Border IP Infringement and the Brussels I Reg... Link to: Mixed Contracts, the Vienna Sales Convention and the Brussels Convention Link to: Mixed Contracts, the Vienna Sales Convention and the Brussels Convention Mixed Contracts, the Vienna Sales Convention and the Brussels Convention
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top