Can a concluded commercial lawsuit be annulled? What every company should know about procedural fraud

Executive Summary:

The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) recently opened the door to validating the possibility of annulling concluded commercial lawsuits when procedural fraud or collusion is proven. This change in criteria could impact the certainty of final judgments involving commercial obligations. We analyze when this action is appropriate, what risks it poses for companies, and what preventive measures should be adopted.

Imagine that your company won a commercial lawsuit months ago and the judgment is now final.

Is there a legal action that seeks to annul a commercial judgment?

Until recently, the answer was categorical: no, not in commercial matters. However, on November 26, 2025, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) voted by a majority of five to four in favor of admitting the possibility of annulling concluded commercial judgments when there is evidence that the judgment was obtained through procedural fraud, collusion, or based on false evidence.

The central argument of the majority is that res judicata, that is to say, the principle that gives certainty to judicial decisionsIt cannot serve as a shield to validate fraudulent acts. For companies, this presents both risks and opportunities that should be understood.

What is the action for annulment of a concluded trial?

This is an independent civil proceeding that challenges the legality of the previous process, not its substantive issues. Its purpose is to overturn final judgments when it is demonstrated, exceptionally, that the ruling was based on maneuvers contrary to procedural good faith.

This figure originated in the Code of Civil Procedures of the Federal District, now Mexico City, in articles 737 A to 737 L, replicated in the National Code of Civil and Family Procedures in articles 52 to 61.

The action for annulment is appropriate when:

• The ruling was based on evidence declared or recognized as false, and
• There was collusion or other fraudulent maneuver between the parties to the trial whose annulment is sought.

Key deadlines:

To file such an action, the deadline is one year from the date the judgment became final, or a maximum of three months from the date the petitioner knew or should have known the grounds for it. After these deadlines have passed, the action will simply not be admissible.

The shift in commercial law: What could change and why is it relevant?

Current jurisprudence (P./J. 14/2025) (11a.) establishes that it is not possible to annul a concluded commercial trial, since the Commercial Code does not provide for this figure and it is not viable to apply it in a supplementary manner.

The logic revolves around the principle that supplementary application of the law does not allow the introduction of a legal concept that the law does not expressly contemplate. Therefore, it was argued that since the Commercial Code does not provide for an action to annul a concluded judgment and does not establish any exception to the principle of res judicata, it was not viable to resort to civil procedural law to bring such an action.

However, in November 2025, the newly constituted Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) changed its stance when analyzing Amparo Directo en Revisión 6585/2023. The case involved a woman who requested the annulment of a commercial executive judgment, alleging that the defendants simulated legal acts to feign insolvency and evade child support obligations. By a vote of five to four, the Court determined that it is indeed possible to reopen concluded commercial judgments for review when fraud has been proven.

From the above, it is important to understand the complexity of this action, since the filing of the action for annulment of a concluded trial does not suspend the execution of the final resolution that motivates it, provided that the winner grants a guarantee of at least the amount equivalent to thirty percent of what was sentenced; or, the amount that the Judge prudently sets in those processes in which what was sentenced has not dealt with patrimonial issues or are of indeterminate amount.

What does this mean for companies?

If the current jurisprudential criterion were replaced, it would then allow for the processing of the Action for Nullity of a Concluded Judgment in commercial trials, undoubtedly setting a trend that companies should not ignore.

In other words, if a company obtained a favorable judgment in a commercial lawsuit, the losing party could attempt to overturn that judgment under the provisions of Article 737-A. Conversely, if the company was harmed by a lawsuit it suspects was fraudulent, and the current legal precedent were superseded, it could file an action to reverse that judgment.

To date, the current jurisprudence P./J. 14/2025 (11a.) is binding, which in simple terms maintains that, “If the procedural law does not expressly provide for the action of nullity of a concluded trial, then that action is not admissible, even if it is alleged that the trial was fraudulent.".

Therefore, it is clear that despite the ruling issued by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) in November 2025, which suggests a different interpretation, this ruling is not currently binding. Rather, it serves as an advisory criterion, not a mandatory or binding one, because it did not obtain the necessary votes to become a binding precedent. In practice, it currently functions as an argument to be considered, but not as a rule that judges are obligated to apply.

If in the future the SCJN were to change the binding criterion (that is, surpass P./J. 14/2025), then the door could be opened to annul certain commercial trials already concluded when there are clear signs that the sentence was obtained with fraud, hidden agreements between parties (collusion) or false evidence.

Practical recommendations:

If a company faces or has faced commercial litigation, it should consider the following: review whether any judgments concluded against it could have been based on the grounds established in Article 737-A of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Federal District, now Mexico City. In that case, document and safeguard all evidence of its legal proceedings, especially in complex transactions or disputes with multiple parties; and assess whether judgments in its favor could be subject to an attempt to overturn them by the affected party.

Finally, we invite our readers to stay tuned to our newsletter. We reiterate that, to date, jurisprudence P./J. 14/2025 (11a.) remains the binding reference. We will promptly share any relevant updates regarding cases in which the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) supersedes the current precedent.

The legal landscape surrounding the annulment of a concluded trial is undergoing a profound transformation. Anticipating these changes can make the difference between protecting your interests and being exposed to an unexpected action.

Our civil and commercial litigation team is experienced in these types of cases and can help you assess your specific situation. Contact us for a review of your current or completed cases.