3. Intellectual Property
  5. Mexico: The Supreme Court of Justice declared unconstitutional the Law for the Transparency, Prevention and Combating of Improper Practices in Advertising Contracts

Mexico: The Supreme Court of Justice declared unconstitutional the Law for the Transparency, Prevention and Combating of Improper Practices in Advertising Contracts

20 Jan 2023    2 minute read

In brief

On 3 June 2021, the Law for Improper Advertising Practices was published in the official journal of the federation (DOF). This law aims to promote transparency in the advertising market, to prevent and combat commercial practices that constitute an undue advantage in favor of specific individuals to the detriment of advertisers and consumers.

Thousands of Companies submitted an "amparo" action alleging that the LIAP transgressed several human rights. Also, the Federal Institute of Telecommunications (IFT) filed a constitutional action seeking a general declaration of unconstitutionality.

Contents

This January 2023, the LIAP was declared unconstitutional by the SCJN, considering that it violates the human rights of freedom to work, free contracting, freedom to trade and autonomy of will. However, this ruling is one isolated criterion which is not binding and has no general application yet, as it will only protect those who are parties in the "amparo" action that gave origin to the court ruling (since it is not a general declaration of unconstitutionality). Nonetheless, this is an important precedent that should be used by all the Courts to grant the "amparos", and also will help to pursue in the future a general declaration of unconstitutionality of the LIAP.

Key takeaways

  • According to the SCJN, "The law contravenes the constitutional regime in force, since commercial relations must be free transactions in which the contracting parties exercise their will with authenticity, without any conduct of any nature being imposed on such free agreements, without being intervened by third parties, including the State".
  • The law prohibits advertising agencies from contracting spaces in the media to later resell them to advertisers, a common practice in the sector, and orders the Federal Economic Competition Commission (COFECE) to impose fines of up to 4% of the annual income of violators.
  • The SCJN rejected that the resale of advertising can be classified as an illegal activity since it violates the human right of freedom to trade.
  • This resolution is only bound for the plaintiff and defendant in the particular case but not for every person or company.
  • This resolution is an important precedent that should be used by all the Courts to grant the "amparos" submitted by the Companies, and also will help to pursue in the future a general declaration of unconstitutionality of the LIAP, when the constitutional action filed by the IFT is resolved by the SCJN.
Contact Information
Carlos Vela-Trevino
Partner
México City
Read my Bio
carlos.vela-trevino@bakermckenzie.com
Daniel Villanueva-Plasencia
Partner
Guadalajara
Read my Bio
daniel.villanueva-plasencia@bakermckenzie.com
Roberto Cardona Zapata
Partner
México City
Read my Bio
roberto.cardona-zapata@bakermckenzie.com

Copyright © 2024 Baker & McKenzie. All rights reserved. Ownership: This documentation and content (Content) is a proprietary resource owned exclusively by Baker McKenzie (meaning Baker & McKenzie International and its member firms). The Content is protected under international copyright conventions. Use of this Content does not of itself create a contractual relationship, nor any attorney/client relationship, between Baker McKenzie and any person. Non-reliance and exclusion: All Content is for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal and regulatory developments. All summaries of the laws, regulations and practice are subject to change. The Content is not offered as legal or professional advice for any specific matter. It is not intended to be a substitute for reference to (and compliance with) the detailed provisions of applicable laws, rules, regulations or forms. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any action or refraining from taking any action based on any Content. Baker McKenzie and the editors and the contributing authors do not guarantee the accuracy of the Content and expressly disclaim any and all liability to any person in respect of the consequences of anything done or permitted to be done or omitted to be done wholly or partly in reliance upon the whole or any part of the Content. The Content may contain links to external websites and external websites may link to the Content. Baker McKenzie is not responsible for the content or operation of any such external sites and disclaims all liability, howsoever occurring, in respect of the content or operation of any such external websites. Attorney Advertising: This Content may qualify as “Attorney Advertising” requiring notice in some jurisdictions. To the extent that this Content may qualify as Attorney Advertising, PRIOR RESULTS DO NOT GUARANTEE A SIMILAR OUTCOME. Reproduction: Reproduction of reasonable portions of the Content is permitted provided that (i) such reproductions are made available free of charge and for non-commercial purposes, (ii) such reproductions are properly attributed to Baker McKenzie, (iii) the portion of the Content being reproduced is not altered or made available in a manner that modifies the Content or presents the Content being reproduced in a false light and (iv) notice is made to the disclaimers included on the Content. The permission to re-copy does not allow for incorporation of any substantial portion of the Content in any work or publication, whether in hard copy, electronic or any other form or for commercial purposes.

HighQ
Copyright Baker McKenzie 2024 | Disclaimers | Supplemental Privacy Statement