No e-appointment at Mexico City courts does not breach access to justice
Unavailability of appointments in the Mexico City Judiciary's electronic system to file documents. It does not violate the right of access to justice, because General Agreement 35-39/2022 of the Plenary of the former local Judicial Council provides alternative means for their receipt.
Official heading (Spanish): FALTA DE DISPONIBILIDAD DE CITAS EN EL SISTEMA ELECTRÓNICO DEL PODER JUDICIAL DE LA CIUDAD DE MÉXICO PARA PRESENTAR ESCRITOS. NO VIOLA EL DERECHO DE ACCESO A LA JUSTICIA, PORQUE EL ACUERDO GENERAL 35-39/2022 DEL PLENO DEL EXTINTO CONSEJO DE LA JUDICATURA LOCAL PREVÉ VÍAS ALTERNAS PARA SU RECEPCIÓN.
The ruling
Collegiate Circuit Courts disagreed on whether the lack of appointments in the Mexico City Judiciary's electronic system for filing documents violates article 17 of the Constitution. The Regional Plenary Court ruled, in binding precedent (jurisprudencia), that it does not, because General Agreement 35-39/2022 also provides a walk-in User Service Turn Module to file documents the same day without an appointment.
Our take
This shuts down an argument some litigators used to excuse missed deadlines: "there were no appointments." It no longer works. If the portal is saturated, the burden is on the filer to go to the Common Filing Office and take a turn. For companies with civil or commercial litigation in Mexico City, the last day of a deadline is not the day to depend on an electronic system. Our view: the precedent is reasonable as long as the walk-in module truly works; if it also fails in a given case, document it on the spot.
What to do
- Ask outside counsel to file documents before the last day of the deadline.
- If no appointments are available, go to the walk-in User Service Turn Module and keep the ticket.
- If the walk-in option also fails, document it through a notary or dated evidence.
Details
- Court
- Regional Plenary Courts
- Type
- Binding precedent (jurisprudencia)
- Identifier
- PR.A.C.CN. J/45 A (12a.)
- Digital registry
- 2032560
- Published
- August 28, 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.