Damages Lawsuit by Reproductores Avícolas
C. 01044-2012-00279 • Thirteenth Civil Court • Guatemala
Damages Lawsuit by Reproductores Avícolas
This is an ordinary civil lawsuit. Reproductores Avícolas, S.A. sued Lisa, S.A. seeking damages, alleging that Lisa committed wrongful acts that justified its exclusion as a shareholder and caused financial losses. Lisa denied liability and filed several preliminary exceptions, including defective claim, prescription, lack of condition fulfillment, lack of standing, and caducity.
Decisions
Whether Lisa’s preliminary exceptions barred Reproductores Avícolas’ damages claim.
The court upheld the objections of defective claim and prescription, and ordered Reproductores Avícolas to pay costs.
The damages claim was dismissed at trial as defective and time-barred; Lisa was shielded from liability.
Court dismissed damages claim by Reproductores and Villalobos
Whether the prior dismissal order required clarification to address the legal effects of prescription on precautionary measures.
The court expanded its January 26, 2021 order and expressly ordered the lifting of all precautionary measures, maintaining the dismissal with full legal effect.
All precautionary measures imposed against Lisa were expressly lifted following dismissal of the claim.
Lifts precautionary measures after prescription ruling
Reproductores Avícolas appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in sustaining Lisa’s exceptions of defective claim and prescription.
The Court of Appeals rejected the appeal and confirmed the trial court’s ruling, agreeing that the lawsuit was procedurally defective and prescribed.
The damages claim was definitively dismissed; Lisa remained free of liability. Costs imposed on Reproductores Avícolas.
Appeals court upheld dismissal for Reproductores
Whether the Court of Appeals misapplied or misinterpreted the law in confirming prescription and defective claim exceptions.
The Civil Chamber dismissed the cassation appeal, confirmed that the damages action was time-barred under Article 1673 of the Civil Code, and ordered costs and a monetary fine against the appellant.
The dismissal of the damages claim was upheld at cassation; prescription was definitively confirmed in Lisa’s favor.
Dismisses time-barred damages claim
Whether the Supreme Court’s cassation ruling violated due process, the right to appeal, or effective judicial protection.
The Constitutional Court denied the amparo as manifestly unfounded, upheld the cassation decision confirming prescription, and imposed a fine on the sponsoring attorney.
All prior rulings were constitutionally validated; Lisa’s freedom from liability became final and unassailable.
Denies challenge to prescription ruling
Conclusion
The damages lawsuit filed by Reproductores Avícolas against Lisa, S.A. was dismissed at every judicial level. The courts consistently held that the claim was procedurally defective and time-barred under applicable law, a conclusion later upheld on cassation and constitutionally validated through the denial of amparo, definitively excluding any liability for Lisa.