ARTEGIABoutique Consulting Firm
ES

Precedents · Commented

CriticalLabor and social security

Miss the labor answer and you can no longer prove a for-cause termination

Contrary evidence in labor matters. The evidence provided for in articles 712 and 873-A of the Federal Labor Law is not compatible with the defense of termination for cause.

Official heading (Spanish): PRUEBA EN CONTRARIO EN MATERIA LABORAL. LA PREVISTA EN LOS ARTÍCULOS 712 Y 873-A DE LA LEY FEDERAL DEL TRABAJO NO ES COMPATIBLE CON LA EXCEPCIÓN DE RESCISIÓN.

The ruling

A company did not answer a reinstatement claim but offered contrary evidence to show it had terminated the workers for dishonesty. The labor court ruled for the employer. On amparo, the Collegiate Circuit Court held that contrary evidence under articles 712 and 873-A of the Federal Labor Law is not compatible with the termination-for-cause defense, which must be raised in the answer.

Our take

The message for employers is harsh and clear: termination for cause is a merits defense and belongs in the answer. If the company fails to answer, it can only prove there was no employment, no dismissal, or that the claim's facts are false; it cannot introduce its own account of a justified termination. Administrative records and the termination notice, however well prepared, lose their value. In our experience, a missed answer almost always stems from service mishandled internally. That is the risk to close.

What to do

  • Ensure every labor claim reaches the legal team the same day it is received.
  • Expressly raise termination for cause in the answer, with its facts and evidence.
  • Keep centralized tracking of answer deadlines across all workplaces.

Details

Court
Collegiate Circuit Court
Type
Isolated precedent
Identifier
VIII.1o.C.T.1 L (12a.)
Digital registry
2032236
Published
June 5, 2026
Area
Labor and social security
View official source ↗

Does this ruling affect your company? Let’s talk.

Schedule a conversation

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.