Latest update
The Second Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals, in its ruling of March 17, 2025, denied Lisa, S.A.'s appeal and confirmed the rejection of its preliminary exceptions, with costs imposed on Lisa for the appellate proceedings.
Exp. 01048-2024-00297 · Ordinary Action for Abuse of Right
The Second Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals, in its ruling of March 17, 2025, denied Lisa, S.A.'s appeal and confirmed the rejection of its preliminary exceptions, with costs imposed on Lisa for the appellate proceedings.
Avícola Villalobos, S.A. sued Lisa, S.A. in an ordinary civil proceeding for abuse of right and damages, alleging that Lisa acted with excess and bad faith by filing a criminal complaint in 2013 that was dismissed at the request of the Public Prosecutor's Office. Lisa maintains that it legitimately exercised its right to file complaints and that the plaintiff failed to prove any harm. Both the Seventh Civil Court of First Instance and the Second Court of Appeals rejected Lisa's preliminary exceptions, allowing the lawsuit to proceed toward the evidentiary phase. The case remains pending before the trial court.
Avícola Villalobos, S.A. filed an ordinary lawsuit against Lisa, S.A. for abuse of right, alleging that Lisa acted with excess and bad faith by filing a criminal complaint in 2013 before the Fourth Criminal Court of First Instance (criminal case 01069-2013-00541), which was dismissed at the request of the Public Prosecutor's Office. This case is part of a broader litigation strategy by the Avícola Villalobos Group, which reverses the roles by accusing Lisa of abuse of right for filing a criminal complaint, when Lisa was excluded as a shareholder precisely by entities of the same group.
The Seventh Civil Court of First Instance rejected both preliminary exceptions filed by Lisa: defective complaint and failure to meet condition. Lisa argued that the complaint grounded its claim in Article 18 of the Judiciary Act (abuse of right), but the facts described alleged defamation that should have been grounded in Article 1656 of the Civil Code. Regarding the failure-to-meet-condition exception, Lisa maintained that the criminal complaint was a legitimate exercise of a subjective right and that there was no conflict with third-party rights.
The court determined that Lisa's arguments sought to have the court decide merits questions that must be resolved at trial, verified that the complaint met all formal requirements of law, and concluded that the plaintiff's claim is not subject to any condition or term within the meaning of the exception. Lisa was ordered to pay costs of the incident.
Lisa appealed raising three grievances: the disconnect between legal basis and facts as an incurable formal defect, the failure to prove the alleged illicit purpose and harm, and the impropriety of the cost award given that Lisa acted in good faith.
The Second Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals confirmed the first-instance ruling. The court held that the defective complaint exception is strictly procedural and limited to verifying formal requirements, concluding that the legal basis invoked bears a relationship to the facts alleged and that determining whether the facts constitute defamation is a merits question. On the failure-to-meet-condition exception, the court analyzed the doctrine of Mario Aguirre Godoy, Juan Montero Aroca, and Mauro Chacón Corado, as well as the Circular of March 27, 1980, determining that Lisa's arguments regarding the nonexistence of abuse do not constitute conditions but rather merits issues. On costs, the court applied Article 576 of the Civil and Commercial Procedural Code, concluding that the good faith invoked by Lisa does not constitute a ground for exemption.
The ruling allows the abuse-of-right and damages lawsuit to proceed toward the evidentiary phase and trial, where Lisa will be able to present its full defense on the merits.
| Date | Document | Issued by |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 26 2024 | Order | 7th Civil Court |
| Mar 17 2025 | Appeal Ruling | Court of Appeals |
The file has been returned to the Seventh Civil Court of First Instance to continue the ordinary proceeding. The case will advance to the evidentiary phase and trial, where Lisa, S.A. will be able to present its full defense on the merits of the abuse-of-right and damages claim.