Cassation Ruling

On December 15, 2023, the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice dismissed the cassation appeal filed by Reproductores Avícolas, S.A. against an appellate order that had confirmed the dismissal of its ordinary damages action against Lisa, S.A. The lower courts had upheld a preliminary exception of prescription, finding that the plaintiff had knowledge of the alleged damages no later than April 4, 2011, when the purported wrongful acts were expressly identified and detailed during a shareholders’ meeting. Because the lawsuit was filed on April 16, 2012—more than one year later—the courts concluded that the claim was time-barred under Article 1673 of the Civil Code.

The Supreme Court rejected all cassation arguments, including alleged procedural violations, misapplication of the law, and erroneous statutory interpretation. The Court emphasized that prescription begins when the injured party becomes aware of the damage and its author, not when damages are quantified by an expert or approved by a judge. As a result, the Court confirmed the validity of the prescription ruling, dismissed the cassation appeal in full, ordered Reproductores Avícolas, S.A. to pay court costs, and imposed a fine of Q500.