Latest update
The Constitutional Court denied Lisa, S.A.'s amparo on December 5, 2019, confirming that the appellate ruling sustaining lack of standing is depurative and not subject to cassation.
Exp. 01163-2011-01084 · Summary Opposition to Shareholder Exclusion
The Constitutional Court denied Lisa, S.A.'s amparo on December 5, 2019, confirming that the appellate ruling sustaining lack of standing is depurative and not subject to cassation.
Lisa, S.A. filed a summary opposition lawsuit challenging its exclusion as shareholder of Distribuidora Avícola del Norte, S.A. (Expediente 01163-2011-01084). The Thirteenth Civil Court of First Instance ruled in Lisa's favor and annulled the exclusion resolution, but the First Chamber of the Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals reversed that judgment on the ground of lack of standing (falta de personería), without reaching the merits. The Supreme Court dismissed Lisa's cassation appeal and the Constitutional Court denied amparo, confirming that depurative rulings are not subject to cassation. No court has ruled on the merits of Lisa's exclusion as shareholder.
Lisa, S.A. filed a summary opposition lawsuit challenging its exclusion as shareholder of Distribuidora Avícola del Norte, S.A. before the Thirteenth Civil Court of First Instance of the department of Guatemala. In a ruling dated November 4, 2014, the court declared the claim meritorious, annulled the exclusion resolution, and rejected the defendant's peremptory exceptions.
Distribuidora Avícola del Norte appealed to the First Chamber of the Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals. The defendant raised for a second time the exceptions of lack of legal personality and lack of standing, which were admitted for proceedings. In a ruling dated August 4, 2017, the Chamber rejected the lack of legal personality exception but sustained the lack of standing (falta de personería) exception, reversing the first-instance judgment and ordering Lisa to pay costs. The Chamber did not rule on the merits of the exclusion. Lisa's requests for clarification and expansion were denied.
Lisa filed a cassation appeal on grounds of form and substance (Expediente 01002-2018-0028). The Supreme Court of Justice, Civil Chamber, dismissed the appeal on November 22, 2018, holding that the challenged ruling lacked objective appealability because it did not address the merits but only resolved a depurative exception.
The Constitutional Court of Guatemala, in a ruling dated December 5, 2019 (Expediente 881-2019), denied the amparo filed by Lisa, S.A. against the Supreme Court of Justice, Civil Chamber.
Petitioner's claims. Lisa, S.A. alleged violations of its rights to defense, due process, equality, free access to courts, and legality. It argued that the cassation dismissal left it in a state of legal uncertainty, that a merits ruling existed at first instance and Lisa held an acquired right under that judgment, and that the lack of standing exception had already been rejected at first instance, meaning the procedural opportunity to raise it again had precluded.
Position of the interested third party and the Public Ministry. Distribuidora Avícola del Norte argued that the petitioner failed to meet the procedural requirements for amparo and that the challenged ruling was legally sound. The Public Ministry requested that constitutional protection be denied.
Court's analysis. The Constitutional Court determined that the Civil Chamber acted in accordance with Article 633 of the Civil and Commercial Procedural Code in classifying the challenged resolution as non-definitive. It invoked its settled precedent (Expedientes 4234-2014, 3360-2009, and 3799-2008) to hold that rulings sustaining depurative exceptions are not definitive and not subject to cassation, regardless of whether the challenged ruling was formally a judgment or an interlocutory order. The Court also referenced its March 2, 2017 ruling in Expediente 3637-2016, a prior amparo brought by the same Lisa, S.A., where it stated that exceptions raised in the appellate stage could be proposed at any point during the proceedings and should be resolved in the corresponding judgment.
"el motivo por el cual se revocó la sentencia de primer grado fue eminentemente depurativo y no resolvió en definitiva el asunto que dio origen a la controversia objeto de la demanda, toda vez que únicamente le hace saber la deficiencia contenida en el documento en el cual pretendía acreditar la personería con la que actuaba"
Ruling.
Practical effect: The denial of amparo confirms that the extraordinary remedies (cassation and amparo) were exhausted without any court ruling on the merits of Lisa's exclusion as shareholder. The procedural result of the appeal (sustaining the lack of standing exception) stands, and the only path to a merits determination is to cure the representation deficiency and resume the ordinary proceedings. This case is part of a group of four opposition proceedings challenging Lisa's exclusion as shareholder from various entities within the Avícola Villalobos Group, including the oppositions before Reproductores Avícolas, S.A., Compraventa de Productos Alimenticios, S.A., and Avícola Las Margaritas, S.A.
| Date | Document | Issued by |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 5 2019 | Amparo Ruling | Constitutional Court |
No court has ruled on the merits of Lisa's exclusion as shareholder. The procedural path to a merits determination requires curing the representation deficiency and resuming the ordinary proceedings.