Nullity complaint by mail: no proof of exact hour when time compensation applies
Nullity complaint filed by certified mail. When the time-compensation mechanism applies, the filer is not required to prove the exact time of postal deposit for the filing to be timely.
Official heading (Spanish): DEMANDA DE NULIDAD PRESENTADA POR CORREO CERTIFICADO. CUANDO OPERA EL MECANISMO DE COMPENSACIÓN HORARIA, NO ES EXIGIBLE AL PROMOVENTE ACREDITAR LA HORA EXACTA DEL DEPÓSITO POSTAL PARA CONSIDERAR OPORTUNA SU PRESENTACIÓN.
The ruling
A party filed by certified mail a nullity complaint against a ruling of the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property. It argued Correos de México's hours prevented filing on the last day and invoked time compensation, which allows filing in the first hours of the next business day. The Collegiate Circuit Court held that requiring proof of the exact deposit time imposes an evidentiary burden the rules do not provide.
Our take
Time compensation is an underused tool, and this ruling makes it safer. When it applies, the court cannot add a requirement to prove the exact time of postal deposit before treating the complaint as timely. The case involved the TFJA's specialized intellectual property chamber, but the reasoning on unprovided burdens can be raised before other chambers. Even so, we do not recommend running down the clock. Certified mail adds uncertainty, and online filing is more predictable. If there is no alternative, keep every record of the filing attempt.
What to do
- File nullity complaints days ahead and prefer online filing before the TFJA.
- If using certified mail at the deadline, keep evidence of the post office's hours.
- Cite this ruling if a chamber demands proof of deposit time despite time compensation applying.
Details
- Court
- Collegiate Circuit Court
- Type
- Isolated precedent
- Identifier
- I.11o.A.14 A (12a.)
- Digital registry
- 2032735
- Published
- October 9, 2026
- Area
- Tax litigation
- 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.