Order

By order of March 21, 2024, the Fifteenth Civil Court of First Instance of Guatemala admitted BDT Investments Inc. as a third-party co-litigant (tercero coadyuvante) supporting Lisa, S.A. in summary proceeding Expediente 01165-2018-00276, filed by Administradora de Restaurantes, S.A. and Compañía Importadora La Perla, S.A. BDT's intervention formalizes the direct participation of the assignee of Lisa's rights in the defense of the proceeding.

Case Background

Rossana Mishelle Ramírez Paredes appeared in the proceeding by filing a memorial and supporting documents that established her capacity as special judicial representative of BDT Investments Inc. The court verified the documentation and recognized her legal standing, noting that she would act under her own direction and legal counsel.

Ruling

• BDT Investments Inc. was admitted as a third-party co-litigant of Lisa, S.A., pursuant to Articles 549 and 553 of the Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure
• The court recognized Rossana Mishelle Ramírez Paredes as BDT's special judicial representative
• The parties were ordered notified

Legal Basis

• Articles 549 and 553, Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure — statutory basis for third-party co-litigant admission
• Articles 12, 28, 29, 203, and 204, Constitution of the Republic of Guatemala — due process and judicial administration guarantees
• Articles 25, 26, 28, 44, 45, 46, 51, 61–67, 69–72, 79, 106, 229, 547, and 548, Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure — applicable procedural rules
• Articles 141–143, Judiciary Act — regulation of legal standing
• Articles 7, 13, 17, 18–23, 28–36, Decree 13-2022 — electronic case file processing

Subsequent Proceedings

Administradora de Restaurantes, S.A. filed a revocatoria motion against this order, arguing that the notarization of the Panamanian document violated the Notarial Code and that BDT was attempting to substitute Lisa as the defendant. The court denied the revocatoria in its order of April 2, 2024, confirming that BDT's admission was lawfully issued. Administradora subsequently filed a motion for clarification and extension, which was likewise denied in the order of April 26, 2024.