YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Diplomado de Actualización en Derecho Procesal Mercantil

Diplomado de Actualización en Derecho Procesal Mercantil — Transcript

by Instituto de la Judicatura · 12,954 words · 2,052 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

23:53Good afternoon to you all, and a warm
23:55welcome to those joining us via digital
23:57media to continue with the academic
24:00schedule of our diploma program
24:01regarding the latest updates in the
24:04field of commercial procedural law. As
24:08part of the third session of module 5,
24:11commercial oral justice, current
24:13advances and challenges, today we have
24:16the pleasure of having the
24:18participation of Dr. Roberto Treviño
24:20Ramos to address the topic of
24:22collective auction hearings. I would
24:27like to read his resume. Dr. Roberto
24:31Treviño Ramos is the director of the
24:33judicial inspection office of the
24:35Judicial Council of the State of Nuevo
24:38León. He holds a degree in Law and
24:40Social Sciences, a master's degree in
24:43corporate law, and a doctorate in
24:45philosophy with a focus on
24:46international relations, business, and
24:48diplomacy from the Autonomous
24:50University of Nuevo León, where he
24:52obtained the degree of Convencion
24:54Honorifica Laud. He has more than
24:5830 years of experience in the Judicial
25:01Branch of the State of Nuevo León, an
25:03institution in which he has developed a
25:06career in jurisdictional areas of
25:08judicial administration and management.
25:15In his current position, he promotes
25:18projects aimed at supervision,
25:20evaluation, innovation and continuous
25:23improvement of the bodies responsible
25:26for administering justice. He is a
25:30member of the National System of
25:32Researchers and Investigators. He has
25:34been recognized as a desirable profile
25:36by PRODEF. He is part of the academic
25:39faculty of the Institute of the
25:40Judiciary of the State of Nuevo León.
25:43He has also developed an extensive
25:45teaching career in undergraduate and
25:48graduate programs. As a researcher and
25:52author, he has participated in the
25:54preparation of articles, book chapters
25:56and specialized publications related to
25:59judicial management, procedural orality
26:01, institutional innovation, the digital
26:04transformation of justice and the
26:06modernization of the courts. He has
26:09also participated as a lecturer and
26:12speaker in various academic forums. He
26:16is currently participating in projects
26:18related to the implementation of the
26:21National Code of Civil and Family
26:23Procedures and the strengthening of
26:25more efficient, accessible, and
26:27people-centered justice models. Welcome
26:33, Professor. On the other hand, it is
26:36important to note that at the end of
26:38the conference, there will be a space
26:40for questions from attendees. If anyone
26:43wishes to do so, please raise your hand
26:46and colleagues will provide the
26:48microphone for you to use. Those
26:51joining us from a distance are welcome
26:53to listen, while participants attending
26:55virtually may submit their comments and
26:58questions using the box provided within
27:02the Zoom platform, and these will be
27:03read aloud during the session to the
27:04extent that it remains possible for us
27:05to do so. Thank you, Dr. Roberto
27:07Treviño Ramos. Thank you very much for
27:10joining us today. Please go ahead.
27:13Thank you, Professor. No, and thank you
27:15all for the time you have dedicated to
27:18this course. And I was just remembering
27:20that today is actually the final
27:22session that we have for this entire
27:23course. So, in this regard, I would
27:27like to express my sincere
27:28congratulations for the effort and time
27:31you dedicated to this training. I am
27:35also very pleased to see many familiar
27:36faces from the concurrent courts and
27:38small claims courts here. So, please
27:41feel free to participate when the
27:43moment for interaction, questions, and
27:45the like arrives. We can do this with
27:47complete confidence and total ease, and
27:49you can leave me on the field to see
27:51how much of what you ask I can answer,
27:53is that all right? So, I have prepared
27:57a very interesting, practical, and
27:59specific presentation for you. It
28:04consists of three phases. This is the
28:09phase of the background to this topic
28:12or this strategy of collective hearings
28:15. I don't know if I'm advancing. The
28:19second phase of this presentation
28:21consists of a practical case. I agree
28:24that the best way to learn is through
28:26practice, and I took the liberty of
28:29arranging for you a final hearing which
28:32will be conducted on a collective basis
28:34. We will reflect upon it and carry out
28:38some analyses; this will finally
28:40constitute the third part of the
28:42presentation, analysis, and reflections
28:44regarding this hearing. Our goal is to
28:49ensure we understand the judicial
28:52strategy developed to promote the
28:55principle of prompt justice, the
28:57decongestion of judicial bodies, and
29:00the optimal use of time by litigants,
29:03users, and Judicial Branch officials.
29:09This is to make the path toward the
29:11administration of justice more
29:12efficient and to ensure full compliance
29:14with all constitutional principles and
29:16mandates regarding the delivery of
29:18speedy justice. So, the first thing to
29:23do is to define or distinguish what a
29:26hearing is, a collective hearing.
29:30Throughout the history of this tool
29:35that has been developed in the Judicial
29:38Branch of Nuevo Leon, we have
29:39integrated different elements that make
29:42up the definition of this concept,
29:44since it is not in the law, it is not
29:46regulated, but we have taken on the
29:48task of configuring it scientifically,
29:51of testing it with a scientific
29:53methodology, quantitatively and
29:57qualitatively analyzing all the aspects
30:00that make up this concept and we can
30:03define it as a strategy that allows for
30:05the handling of comparable or
30:07compatible proceedings at the same time
30:10in a single session. That is, different
30:15files that are in the same procedural
30:17stage, with the same procedural
30:19characteristics, are grouped together
30:21so that they can be discussed at a
30:23single time. This characteristic of the
30:27collective hearing allows for
30:29simultaneous action or conduct by the
30:32judge and to address the interests of
30:34different parties, of different
30:36procedures, respecting their
30:38particularities and essential
30:40characteristics. This is very
30:44interesting because the issue of the
30:47principle or systems of orality has
30:50come to require greater demand from
30:54both the litigating forum and the
30:57judicial officials. In the past,
31:01everything was handled mostly in
31:02writing, which allowed the judge to
31:04quickly examine the briefs from the
31:06parties and reach a resolution in a
31:08manner that was, let us say,
31:10simultaneous. The issue with oral
31:14proceedings is that it required the
31:17presence of both the judge and the
31:19parties in hearings in order to exhaust
31:23these principles, and this created a
31:25congestion in the agenda, a saturation
31:29of the system itself, which required a
31:32greater demand on the judge to directly
31:37attend to the parties in person. So,
31:41this required new strategies, new
31:43thinking, and doing things as they had
31:45been previously discussed in the
31:47traditional model, since it complicated
31:50the operation or the operability of the
31:53court. What do I mean by this?
31:56Implementing criteria for scheduling
31:58hearings as was the case in the
32:01previous model, where a specific period
32:03of time was set aside in a standardized
32:06manner for all types of hearings,
32:08without distinguishing between them (
32:11for example, between hearings of
32:13complex trials, simple trials, hearings
32:16of trials that had a response or that
32:18had not been submitted, hearings where
32:22the evidence provided required or did
32:25not require the material intervention
32:27of the court). All of these
32:31characteristics, if hearings were
32:33scheduled in the ordinary manner, would
32:36not be using the time of our users as
32:39well as the human resources of the
32:41judiciary, and particularly of the
32:44judge, since they were present at the
32:47hearing. Then, there was a necessity to
32:51carry out some reflections regarding
32:53this scheduling system. A second
32:57important aspect was the operational
32:59risk, because what happened with these
33:02hearings that could not be held due to
33:04some procedural situation or guarantees
33:07of the parties? Although the time on
33:11the court's agenda, that of the judge
33:14and the parties, was reserved to hold a
33:17hearing, if the notification could not
33:19be made, if no official document or
33:22information was collected, then the
33:24time reserved for the hearing was
33:27ineffective and the purpose of the
33:29scheduling was not achieved. So, that
33:33also put the court's operational
33:35resources at risk and required, in any
33:41case, as I have been mentioning, a
33:43technical response that was, or
33:46consisted particularly of this: to
33:48begin to reflect and analyze, from the
33:53very claim, from the very filing of the
33:55claim, the characteristics that the
33:56processing or integration of this
33:58procedure could have, how the hearings
34:00were going to be handled. So, what did
34:03this little system have? Well, the need
34:06to reflect on these requirements of
34:09greater presence of the judge, greater
34:12demand on time and congestion in
34:16scheduling, as I have been mentioning.
34:19What happened in some courts? Well,
34:21there was a first generation, and here
34:23I'm going to pause briefly. I'm going
34:25to specifically refer to the First
34:27Family Court of the Fifth District. It
34:33was headed by Attorney Rogelios Camilla
34:36, and they had an occasional overload
34:38of no-fault divorce lawsuits. So, even
34:44though they scheduled cases according
34:46to traditional models, since time is
34:47finite, the lawsuits were too many.
34:51Even though they tried to make the
34:54hearing and the characteristics
34:56efficient, it certainly required some
34:58time between the actual hearing, the
35:00waiting periods, entering and leaving
35:03the courtroom, and what happened inside
35:05the hearing, such as identifying
35:07oneself, introducing the parties,
35:10protesting them, carrying out the
35:12different stages of the hearing, no
35:14matter how simple the trial was, in
35:17this case the no-fault divorce. So they
35:21began to look for a strategy to solve
35:24this and they started with that
35:26strategy of collective hearings. They
35:30reflected on what they were developing,
35:33but they needed to resolve this
35:36overwhelming volume of demands, and
35:39that's how they began to group them
35:42together. In my case, I am in charge of
35:47the supervisory and oversight body for
35:50the courts, to assess their
35:52productivity, efficiency, and work
35:56methods, among other things. So, we
36:00undertook the task of analyzing
36:02thoroughly, using a scientific method,
36:04whether or not what they were doing was
36:07valid under the law and for the service
36:10, as a strategy to address the volume
36:12of workloads they had. So, we used a
36:17scientific method; we analyzed what
36:20they were doing qualitatively and also
36:22quantitatively to be able to
36:24corroborate whether or not the
36:26population, society, and the people
36:29involved in that aspect of the strategy
36:32they were developing had any favorable
36:37data to support it. And that's how
36:39we've been developing it. We conducted
36:41a series of analysis samplings,
36:45interviews, and surveys of the
36:49different guarantors, and that led us
36:54to the conclusion that it yielded
36:58favorable data. I mean, it wasn't
37:02something we did, but rather the
37:03collection of information that we did
37:05according to this methodology, because
37:07it yielded a very significant
37:09percentage of satisfaction among users
37:11who participated in collective hearings
37:13; both the material plaintiffs in the
37:15trials and the parties, both the
37:17material and formal plaintiffs or
37:19defendants in the trials, and the other
37:21authorities that participated in the
37:23integration of the procedures, in this
37:25case the Public Defender's Office, the
37:27Public Prosecutor's Office, because it
37:30was also much more convenient for them
37:32to attend a single collective hearing
37:34than to have to divide their schedule
37:36and their efforts into multiple agendas
37:38. So, from the audit perspective, we
37:43took on the task of doing the survey
37:46and we found this favorable data and we
37:49were able to document it in a book.
37:53I'll provide you with the hyperlink at
37:55the end. The book is public, it is part
37:58of the cultural heritage that the
38:00Judicial Branch has on the microsite of
38:02the editorial coordination. But well, I
38:04will tell you a little bit more about
38:05that later. What happened? So, as I was
38:10saying, they did an initial exercise
38:12and this exercise began to be developed
38:15in the deis phase of the litigation, in
38:18the phase of preliminary hearings,
38:20trial hearings and resumption hearings.
38:25They began to group them first by these
38:28trials, which were generally or mostly
38:30very simple proceedings such as divorce
38:33cases, in such a way that the entire
38:36scheduling for a single day could be
38:38concentrated into hearings that lasted
38:41exactly 30 minutes. So, 15, 16 hearings
38:45that they had daily were grouped into
38:4815 to 16 hearings of 15 to 20 minutes
38:51each, they were grouped into a single
38:54hearing, lasting 25 minutes, and they
38:56resolved all this issue. It was very
39:01interesting because if they continued
39:03to do it individually, each of those
39:05hearings, the agenda would have been
39:08extended to very long periods of time
39:10or very far into the future. So, in
39:13some way, it favored this prompt
39:16resolution of the issues. So, of course
39:20, I will allow you to speak, but once
39:22you have finished your presentation, so
39:24as not to take up too much time, okay?
39:27Let's do it like this. So, this system
39:32allowed them to effectively carry out
39:35the purification, the scheduling of
39:38hearings, the settlement, the
39:41concentration of trials at those times
39:44and also to ensure the continuity of
39:47the hearings. That created an initial
39:51challenge for them as to how to do it,
39:53right? Internally, they did it
39:56empirically. They were looking at the
39:59characteristics, as I mentioned, of the
40:01complexity of the matter and then at
40:03what happened in the matter: if at the
40:05time of answering, if there was a
40:06response or not in the phase after the
40:11summons, if the response, uh, what type
40:14of evidence was brought, if it was
40:15going to require material intervention
40:18or not. And that already allowed them
40:20to start developing a mapping and
40:23determining, ah, look, this trial is
40:25simple, it will be grouped. This trial,
40:28uh, brings a response. Yes. Well, let's
40:31see what type of evidence is brought.
40:33Ah, look, it does not require material
40:35intervention, they are documentaries
40:37that I can see beforehand, I send it to
40:40the grouping because of its
40:41characteristics and complexity, those
40:44assumptions do not occur. Ah, well, we
40:46respect what is individuality and that
40:49audience goes and vents in an
40:51individual or particular way. And with
40:54that they gave, uh, a better use to the
40:57time of the scheduling; They scheduled
41:01it more efficiently and achieved better
41:04results for everyone, for users and for
41:07the justice system by having faster
41:10attention, and for the justice system
41:13by not having such a robust scheduling
41:17and, obviously, favoring the principle,
41:21the constitutional mandate to
41:24administer prompt justice contained in
41:28article 17. So, what did they recover
41:31or reconsider from that exercise and
41:35what did we detect? Collective
41:41scheduling is not for all trials,
41:43simply for those that have these
41:45considerations that I mentioned a few
41:47times, that have a functional
41:48similarity, that is, that are in the
41:50same stage. You are not going to
41:53schedule or it is not viable to
41:55schedule a collective hearing for a
41:57trial that is in the preliminary
42:01hearing phase and one that is in the
42:02trial phase, since different things are
42:04going to be discussed. So, you have to
42:07be careful with these types of
42:09situations. There you see it in point
42:12number two, where it refers to
42:14functional similarity, which in any
42:16case means that there is compatibility
42:18in terms of the stages. Point number
42:22three is viability. This is to reflect
42:25from the very moment of filing and how
42:28the procedure is integrated, whether
42:31the characteristics of being able to
42:33group it are going to be given. And
42:38finally, to ensure that, although it is
42:40ventilated collectively, there is the
42:43opportunity to individualize the
42:45characteristics of each of the
42:47processes; that is, to address each one
42:50in the phase that, at the time,
42:52addresses the particularity of each one
42:54of them without disrupting or damaging
42:57that characteristic of particularity.
43:01There in the final part I added a
43:03phrase that says, "Individuality does
43:05not depend on physically separating the
43:07hearings, but on legally preserving the
43:09path of each file." Then this, as I was
43:14mentioning, went to a first phase of
43:17hearings of simple trials, relatively
43:20simple or with low complexity. And, uh,
43:25later on, they were evolving and, once
43:29we documented, uh, this strategy, other
43:32judges were also seeing the opportunity
43:36to apply, uh, this strategy, by analogy
43:40, that, this strategy, in other matters
43:44such as commercial, civil, labor and
43:47criminal, which were also being
43:50developed in these hearings, called
43:53combo. Something interesting was that,
43:58derived from this reflection that we
44:00did in the inspection and from this
44:02analysis, we were able to give a name
44:04to this strategy, since we saw that,
44:06particularly in that court that I am
44:08referring to, they were called:
44:10collective hearings, multitudinous
44:12hearings, multiple hearings, combo
44:13hearings. And based on all the elements
44:17that we saw, we were able to define
44:19them as hearings, collective hearings.
44:22So, in the second generation of this
44:25model, uh, we saw that it migrated to
44:29other matters. I was telling you, for
44:32example, in matters of commercial oral
44:35proceedings, these lawsuits by
44:39portfolio recovery companies or by
44:44people who grant multiple loans, when
44:47these loans fall into default and are
44:49brought to trial, there is also the
44:52opportunity to group them together
44:55since they come, let's put it this way,
44:58from documents that the doctrine calls
45:02adhesive contracts, right? Where all
45:04the clauses are already included,
45:06basically the claim will be the same,
45:07because they all come from the same
45:09clause. And I am referring to contracts
45:11like those used for telephone services,
45:13for automobile loans, for water,
45:15electricity, and telephone services
45:18that we use in our day-to-day lives,
45:20which when they sometimes fall into
45:22default, almost always come with the
45:24same type of claim, with the same
45:26benefits, with the same claims. So,
45:29even from those offices that manage
45:31multiple or truly significant
45:33quantities of various legal cases. So,
45:35there is that opportunity to improve
45:39scheduling. And so this strategy of
45:43promoting the administration of justice
45:45through this tool was extrapolated to
45:47other subjects. Later, and regarding
45:56this course itself, you might say, in
45:58terms of commercial matters, both in
46:04the elite phase, as I have been
46:06mentioning, it has already been
46:08developed; but we also saw, some judges
46:11saw the opportunity to say: "Well, I
46:13see elements or features that I can
46:15apply by analogy to the execution phase
46:18, to the auction phase." And the issue
46:21of having incorporated it into this
46:24course, into this diploma, seemed very
46:26interesting and fabulous to me, because
46:28in some way, the idea is to convey the
46:30benefits of having this strategy, of
46:32developing it and participating in it
46:35when it arises, because in some way, it
46:43tangibly favors a faster administration
46:45of justice, better management of the
46:47agenda and, at the end of the day, it
46:50is what we all seek from our different
46:52areas for our users, you, your clients
46:55and others, which is to quickly resolve
46:57the procedure or the matter in which
47:00you are involved. So, in particular, a
47:04judge in commercial oral proceedings
47:09began to analyze and reflect on all the
47:11characteristics of the document that I
47:13mentioned, the book that was written on
47:15collective hearings, and after studying
47:19and reflecting on it, he saw the
47:21opportunity to apply it. So, we call it
47:25a second generation of the application
47:27of these collective hearings, which is
47:29integrated, first of all, by this
47:31extrapolation to other matters and
47:33secondly, by taking it to the sentence
47:35enforcement phase. So, here in the
47:39information that I prepared for you in
47:43the slides, we divide these two phases:
47:46the first phase, which was the original
47:49one, which corresponds to the
47:51litigation phase, where the hearings
47:54corresponded to controversies, to the
47:58purification and purification of the
48:01evidentiary material, where there are
48:04characteristics of intense
48:05contradiction between the parties and
48:07to the preparation of the decision. And
48:10today it has even been carried out to
48:12the execution phase, where the material
48:15compliance of the sentences or
48:16resolutions is carried out, where it
48:19has patrimonial effects; they are no
48:21longer the same effects as in the
48:23preliminary hearing and trial, where
48:25there is even the participation of
48:27subjects who were not involved in the
48:29procedure, in this case creditors,
48:32third parties, third-party creditors,
48:34including co-owners of the assets and
48:38where different actions are taken by
48:41these subjects in the hearing, such as
48:44bids, adjudication, improvements they
48:47make in the bids. And then we saw that
48:51the collective hearing was not
48:53necessarily to resolve the issue of
48:56hearing controversies, clarification of
48:59the procedure and so on, but it could
49:01also be carried out in this other phase
49:04. So, I will advance the next one. So,
49:09there are two generations of the same
49:11model of collective hearings. One
49:15corresponds to the preparation,
49:16resolution and individualization of the
49:18phases of the hearings. And this other
49:21one that I am going to tell you about
49:23is related to the auction or the
49:25execution of the auction and
49:26adjudication of the assets. So, here we
49:31begin to see certain characteristics
49:34that collective hearings have. What are
49:40these? Look, there are acts in the
49:42collective hearing that are transversal
49:45, that is, the judge performs them for
49:47all participants in the hearing, for
49:49all subjects who participate in the
49:51hearing and who would have participated
49:54individually, which are the opening and
49:56the presentation. Let's imagine the
49:59day-to-day life of a court, and also of
50:02litigants when they have multiple
50:04hearings. The judge arrives at the
50:09hearing, introduces himself, identifies
50:12the parties, protests them, certifies
50:15the identity of the secretary and the
50:18parties, and all that. For example, in
50:22a hearing that lasts 20 minutes, each
50:24one easily takes 7 or 8 minutes. And
50:27the stages or decision-making elements
50:29that the judge makes are another 5
50:31minutes. So, if we multiply those 7 by
50:3510 that the judge has scheduled during
50:37the day, imagine the number of minutes
50:40he does the same thing repeatedly in
50:42the morning. He enters, identifies
50:45himself, introduces himself, identifies
50:47the parties, protests, certifies and
50:49resolves the particular matter or is
50:52informed of its content; the parties
50:54present their case and resolves it, and
50:56then the hearing closes. And then we
50:58move on to the second, third, 15th,
51:0017th in a single day. And if we group
51:04together the judge's transversal acts
51:07in the hearing, it takes an infinite
51:09amount of time, or a very relevant
51:11amount of time, sometimes more than the
51:14decision-making stage. Hence the
51:19efficient use of resources, in this
51:21case time, for both the individuals who
51:24use the services and those who
51:26administer the justice. In the slide
51:30there I divided the two segments, both
51:32the transversal phase and the
51:34individualized acts. In this case, I
51:38only put what are the individualized
51:40acts of the auction hearing, such as
51:42the position, the purchase position,
51:44the particular incidents that may arise
51:47, the legal analysis made by the judge,
51:49the guarantees that must be respected
51:51for each of the participants or those
51:53people who did not attend, such as
51:56third-party creditors, co-owners, to
51:58respect their rights of first refusal
52:00or their preference in the auction, and
52:04the settlement and adjudication. So,
52:06with this we can differentiate that it
52:09certainly does happen in this way in
52:11the auction hearing, acts that are
52:14transversal and that will happen for
52:16all the auctions and acts that are
52:18individualized for each one of them. So
52:23, here we decided to generate a short
52:25sentence at the bottom of the slide
52:28that says, "What is common is
52:30coordinated and done simultaneously.
52:34The decision-making is individualized
52:35and applied to each of the issues in
52:37particular." Now I really like the next
52:42slide because it is a reflection of all
52:46those exercises. So, with that we
52:50finish what is the first phase of this
52:55presentation that I mentioned, to tell
52:58you a little bit about the background
53:00of this strategy of collective hearings
53:03, now in the execution or closing phase
53:05. So, if you allow me, I know that many
53:11of you have already participated in
53:13closing hearings, I know that many have
53:15not. By virtue of some exercises that
53:18we have done here in the forum, and
53:20also with the wide coverage that this
53:22diploma has, I know that there are many
53:24people who may not have taken a trial
53:26to the closing phase. Also, for those
53:30who watch us online, it will be very
53:33useful to see in practice how a auction
53:36. What I'm going to ask you to do is
53:41that at the moment this is a very short
53:43video, it's really three auction
53:45hearings aired in a single moment, or
53:48rather it's a single collective hearing
53:50with three auctions of three different
53:53cases. What I'm going to ask you to do
53:58is, as the video unfolds, reflect on
54:00what actions the judge took
54:05collectively for everyone. What actions
54:08did the judge individualize for the
54:10parties? What actions did the judge
54:13sanction due to the characteristics of
54:16the cases? And how did he justify the
54:19use of this tool to do so. Here I see
54:24some lawyers and colleagues in the
54:26profession that I've had the chance to
54:29participate with from different
54:31perspectives in judicial auctions. And
54:35you're not going to let me lie, no
54:37matter how fast an auction is, the hour
54:39or so can easily go by between the time
54:41you arrive, you introduce yourself,
54:44they receive your documentation, the
54:46hearing begins, and things happen. In
54:49this case, I ask you to reflect on how
54:52long the hearing lasts, okay? How long
54:55does the hearing last and how is it
54:56done? They ventilate the three
54:58procedures there, respecting the
54:59guarantees and particularities of each
55:01one of them? So, uh, colleague, would
55:04you do me the favor of playing the
55:05video.
55:11>> Starting recording.
55:12>> Good morning, everyone. Let me
55:14introduce myself, I am Judge Francisco
55:16Javier Martínez Briones. I am a judge
55:20of commercial oral proceedings of the
55:22first judicial district in the state
55:25and I will preside over this collective
55:28hearing of public auction and first
55:30coin in the annual files 2019, b/2021
55:39and c/2021. In this hearing I will be
55:45assisted by Mónica Patricia Juanes
55:48Oros. She is the secretary of the
55:50judicial management coordination of the
55:53commercial oral proceedings court and
55:55will give you everything that happened
55:57in this hearing. With this, we will
56:01comply with the provisions of article
56:0333, section one of the Organic Law of
56:05the Judicial Branch of the State of
56:07Nuevo León, as well as the provisions
56:09of articles 1080, section one and 1390
56:11bis23 of the Commercial Oral
56:13Proceedings. You are informed that this
56:18hearing is being videotaped in
56:20electronic means to guarantee the
56:22parties and those involved in the same
56:25the rights established in their favor
56:28by articles 1080 section two and 1390
56:30bis 10 bis 24 of the CCO of Commerce.
56:35The recording of this material is full
56:38evidence in accordance with the law
56:40itself and has legal probative value
56:43for all legal purposes. I am going to
56:48ask the secretary, in accordance with
56:51the provisions of article 1390 bis 26
56:54of the Cercio, to attest to the
56:56beginning of this hearing, to attest to
56:59the oath of the parties present, to
57:02take the corresponding oath of law and
57:04establish the purpose of the same, as
57:09well as the value that was issued by
57:11the experts for the holding of this
57:13hearing and that the corresponding
57:15publications have been made to comply
57:18with the provisions of articles 14 10
57:20and 14 CCO of Commerce.
57:22>> Your Honor, good morning. I am Mónica
57:24Patricia Juan Orosco, secretary
57:25assigned to the coordination of
57:27judicial management of the commercial
57:29court, the first official institute of
57:30the state. I hereby certify that this
57:32hearing is taking place. The auction
57:35will be conducted by Francisco Javier
57:36Martínez Brones, judge of the
57:38commercial court of the first judicial
57:40branch of the state, before the faith
57:41of the undersigned secretary. It is
57:44stated that we are acting within the
57:47acts that comprise the judicial files
57:49number A/on 2019 regarding the
57:51commercial oral trial promoted by
57:53Carlos Eduardo Ramírez Torres,
57:55attorney for promoters DFG SAA of CBI
57:57against José Antonio Hernández Silva
58:00and Laura Beatriz Martínez Castillo,
58:02also known as Laura Beatriz. Martínez
58:05Castillo. We also act within the file P
58:08/2021 regarding the commercial
58:10executive trial promoted by Ana María
58:12Rodríguez Flores against Mónica
58:14Guadalupe Torres Hernández. We also
58:17act in file C/2021 regarding the
58:20commercial oral trial promoted by
58:23Desarrollos SCV against Sandra Patricia
58:26Morales Vega. I am stating that this
58:29hearing begins at 11:30 a.m. today,
58:31August 25, 2023, and that we are
58:33currently convened within the second
58:35auction room to proceed with the
58:37session. Located on the 2nd floor of
58:40the Egiles Civil and Commercial Center,
58:42located at 347 Matamoros Street, corner
58:44with Pino Suárez in downtown Monterrey
58:46, Nuevo León. It is noted that the
58:49purpose of this hearing is the public
58:51hearings in first-class auctions
58:53regarding the movable property seized
58:55in the aforementioned lawsuits that
58:57have already been mentioned by the
58:59undersigned property of the defendant
59:01defendant and which consist of the
59:03following. of Experience 2019
59:06constitutes the property marked with
59:08number 4726 of Río Pánico Street,
59:13Valle del Sol neighborhood in Monterrey
59:14, Nuevo León, whose and hills are
59:16derived from the Graes certificate that
59:18is in the file, whose registration data
59:20are as follows: Registration number
59:225168, volume 150, book 148, section 1,
59:28property unit of Monterrey, dated July
59:3123, 2004, of file B/2021, it
59:33constitutes 95%of the real estate
59:35consisting of the dwelling house marked
59:38with the number 2743 on Ignacio
59:40Ramírez Street, Nueva Esperanza
59:43neighborhood, in Monterrey, Nuevo León
59:45, whose registration data is as follows
59:48. Registration number 3187, volume 287,
59:53book 119, property section, unit,
59:56Monterrey, dated April 3, 2018. And
59:59regarding file C/2021, it consists of
1:00:02the land lot marked with the number 14
1:00:05of block 82 of the Los Eninos
1:00:08subdivision, Valleverde sector, in
1:00:11Guadalupe, Nuevo León, whose
1:00:13registration data is: number 124,
1:00:16volume 156, book 7, Property section,
1:00:21Guadalupe Unit, dated February 14,
1:00:232008. I certify that at this hearing
1:00:26for file A/onal 2019, attorney Carlos
1:00:28Eduardo Ramírez Torres attends as
1:00:31legal representative of the plaintiff.
1:00:35His attorney authorized in broad terms,
1:00:37attorney Patricia Elena González
1:00:39Navarro, also appears. In this act, I
1:00:43am going to ask these people to please
1:00:45indicate their name and general
1:00:46information, please.
1:00:48>> Good morning, attorney. My name is
1:00:50Carlos Eduardo Ramírez Torres. I was
1:00:52born in the city of Monterrey, Nuevo
1:00:55León, on May 6, 1972, I am 54 years
1:00:57old. Single, practicing lawyer, with a
1:01:01school degree, bachelor's degree and
1:01:03address at 215 Alfonso Reyes Street,
1:01:06interior 3, Cumbres del Valle
1:01:08neighborhood in Monterrey, Nuevo León.
1:01:12>> Attorney Elena.
1:01:13>> Good morning, Attorney Patricia Elena
1:01:16González Navarro, born in Mexico City
1:01:19on June 21, 1973. Married, attorney by
1:01:21profession with conventional address at
1:01:24215 Alfonso Reyes Street, interior 3,
1:01:27Cumbres del Valle neighborhood in
1:01:29Monterrey, Nuevo León. Regarding file
1:01:33B/2021, Attorney Jorge Luis Ramírez
1:01:36Mendoza appears, who identifies himself
1:01:39by his professional license. He is the
1:01:42endorsee in representation of the party
1:01:44. Plaintiff, Ana María Rodríguez
1:01:46Flores. I would like to ask you to
1:01:48please state your name and general
1:01:50information, please.
1:01:51>> Good morning. Jorge Luis Ramírez
1:01:53Mendoza, I was born in Tampico,
1:01:54Tamaulipas. I am 39 years old, a lawyer
1:01:57by profession, residing at Zaragoza,
1:01:59number 518, Centro building, ISO 4,
1:02:01office 402, Centro neighborhood, in
1:02:04Monterrey, Nuevo León.
1:02:06>> Thank you. Finally, it should be noted
1:02:09that within file C/2021, Claudia
1:02:12Fernanda Navarro Ríos appears. She is
1:02:16the legal representative of the
1:02:18plaintiff and is appearing at this
1:02:20hearing through the Microsoft Teams
1:02:21platform. In this regard, I would like
1:02:24to ask you to please show me
1:02:26identification in front of the camera
1:02:27and please state your name and general
1:02:29information.
1:02:30>> Yes, of course. Here is the
1:02:32identification from the other side
1:02:34again,
1:02:35>> please. Very well, thank you. It should
1:02:40be noted that the aforementioned people
1:02:42who I attest are present at this
1:02:43hearing are identified by means of an
1:02:45official document whose photographs
1:02:47that appear therein match their
1:02:49physical features. facial features. In
1:02:54that sense, considering that all of the
1:02:57witnesses told me that they are law
1:02:59graduates, I will refrain from reading
1:03:01articles 241, 250 and the state
1:03:03criminal law for the purpose of taking
1:03:05the oath of office. Or do any of you
1:03:08have any problem with me not reading
1:03:10them?
1:03:11>> No
1:03:12>> problem. Just one issue. My general
1:03:15information was missing. I don't know
1:03:16if there is any problem.
1:03:18>> Oh, say it. Well, your general
1:03:19information is already in the file
1:03:21anyway, but if not,
1:03:23>> no problem, no problem. I thought it
1:03:24was missing.
1:03:25>> Well, thank you. Uh, you question them
1:03:27and you protest to conduct yourself
1:03:28truthfully in the proceedings of this
1:03:30hearing. For that purpose, please, tell
1:03:32me, raise your right hand starting with
1:03:35the plaintiff in case file A/29 and
1:03:39then with B/2021, please. Mr. Jorge.
1:03:44>> Yes, I protest. Yes, I
1:03:46>> protest.
1:03:48>> Yes, I protest.
1:03:50>> Ms. Claudia Fernanda.
1:03:53>> Yes, I protest.
1:03:54>> Thank you. Continuing with the
1:03:57certification requested by your Your
1:03:59Honor, I place on record the
1:04:00non-appearance of the defendants in
1:04:02these proceedings, despite them having
1:04:08been duly notified of the holding of
1:04:11this hearing, as is reflected in the
1:04:13official records pertaining to the case
1:04:16file identified as B/2021. I also
1:04:19certify the failure of co-owner Miguel
1:04:22Ángel Torres Hernández to appear,
1:04:24despite having been notified. I also
1:04:28certify the failure of the third
1:04:31creditor in the judicial case Cagonal
1:04:342021 Mexican Institute of Housing and
1:04:36Labor. Despite having been notified of
1:04:41the holding and the...Now, I certify
1:04:43that, after analyzing both the physical
1:04:45and electronic files available to the
1:04:48coordination, of the coordination to
1:04:50which I am assigned, it is not evident
1:04:52that within the matters in which they
1:04:54are acting there is any amparo
1:04:56proceeding that would make it
1:04:57impossible to conduct this hearing. Nor
1:05:01is there any document filed by the
1:05:04defendant that would make it impossible
1:05:06to conduct the respective auctions. Now
1:05:11, in this act, I certify that the
1:05:14holding of this hearing within the
1:05:17files in which action is taken was set
1:05:20by means of orders of July 14, 2023.
1:05:26This order is for each of the files in
1:05:29which action is taken. Likewise, it is
1:05:33noted that the publications of the
1:05:36editorials ordered in said order were
1:05:39made in the newspaper Milenio in what
1:05:43concerns file A/A 2019 on August 13 and
1:05:4617 of the current year, in file B/2021
1:05:50on August 10 and 20 of the current year
1:05:53, and in file C/2021 on August 3 and 17
1:05:59of the current year. It is noted that
1:06:02they comply with the requirements
1:06:04established by the applicable
1:06:06legislation. This is article 1411 of
1:06:10the Commercial Code. Now, in this act
1:06:17it is noted that the value of the
1:06:20properties that are auctioned in what
1:06:24concerns file A/A 2019 was set at the
1:06:27value of 1,110,000 pesos and the legal
1:06:34position set at 740,000 pesos. In file
1:06:38B/2021, 95%of the property being
1:06:42auctioned was, well, 100%was valued at
1:06:462,200,000, 95%was valued at 2,90,000
1:06:50pesos, so the legal position was set at
1:06:551,39,333.33 is 3 pesos. Regarding file
1:07:03C/2021, the final value was officially
1:07:07set at 1,411,1,411,000 es. The position
1:07:12was 940,000,940,666 es. Finally, it
1:07:21should be noted that, regarding the
1:07:24current liquid amount of each of the
1:07:27plaintiffs within the files in which
1:07:30action is taken, I will start with file
1:07:33Aonal 2019 and the plaintiff's liquid
1:07:36amount is the amount of 815,719.81, in
1:07:42accordance with the final and
1:07:44interlocutory judgments issued in this
1:07:47matter. In regards to the Bagonal 2021
1:07:51case, the plaintiff is awarded a liquid
1:07:54amount of 2,100,000 pesos as determined
1:07:57by the final court judgment. Finally,
1:08:01regarding the Ciagonal 2021 case, the
1:08:05plaintiff has a liquid amount in its
1:08:09favor of 1,572,861.28, and with that
1:08:17the requested certification has
1:08:18concluded. Sir,
1:08:19>> thank you very much. Well, we are
1:08:22collectively conducting this hearing
1:08:25with a new tool that the Judicial
1:08:27Council is using, which has been
1:08:29authorized precisely to address and
1:08:32comply with Article 17 of the
1:08:34Constitution, since otherwise the
1:08:36holding of these hearings would be
1:08:38prolonged over a very long period of
1:08:40time. Well, having complied with the
1:08:46formal requirements established by
1:08:48Articles 1410 and 1411 of the
1:08:50Commercial Code for holding this
1:08:52hearing, without the presence of the
1:08:55defendants and without the presence of
1:08:58bidders, I will begin the auction, to
1:09:00which I will begin with the first file,
1:09:03which is the Annual 2019, which is the
1:09:06oldest that has been processed. And I
1:09:10will grant the floor to Mr. Carlos
1:09:13Eduardo Ramírez Torres so that in
1:09:15terms of article 490 of the Federal
1:09:18Code of Procedures he can present his
1:09:21position.
1:09:23>> Thank you, Your Honor. My commander's
1:09:26position is to award us the legal
1:09:29position for 740,000 pesos. Well,
1:09:34considering that there is no one who
1:09:37improves on the position offered by the
1:09:39plaintiff in terms of article 492 of
1:09:42the Federal Code of Civil Procedures,
1:09:45in accordance with article 141 of the
1:09:48Commercial Code, the real estate object
1:09:50of this auction of these files Adiagon
1:09:532019 is declared indicted and awarded
1:09:56free of all charges in favor of the
1:09:59plaintiff, which is Promotores DFGS DCB
1:10:03. This is because the plaintiff has
1:10:08sufficient liquidity to cover the
1:10:10liquid amount of the legal position.
1:10:15With this, the City Council is declared
1:10:17and awarded in favor of its represented
1:10:19. Do you have any statement to make? No
1:10:21, sir. Well, you may withdraw if you so
1:10:24wish.
1:10:25>> Thank you. Yes. Well, we will continue
1:10:28with the next auction. What is file B/
1:10:322021? In this file, we are auctioning
1:10:37off 95%of the property that was seized
1:10:41from the defendant. I will grant the
1:10:46floor to the plaintiff, Jorge Luis
1:10:49Ramírez Mendoza, who is the endorsee
1:10:52in representation of Ana María
1:10:54Rodríguez Flores, who, in terms of
1:10:57article 490 of the Federal Code of
1:11:00Civil Procedures, will present his
1:11:02position.
1:11:05>> Our position, Your Honor, will be the
1:11:08direct award of the real estate ring
1:11:10based on the legal position. Well,
1:11:14considering that in this particular
1:11:17case the plaintiff has in its favor a
1:11:20liquid amount of 2,100,000 pesos and
1:11:24that the legal position of this 95%
1:11:30corresponds to the amount of 2,90,000
1:11:33pesos. It is declared settled and
1:11:36awarded. It is declared settled,
1:11:40declares that the aforementioned real
1:11:43estate is solely in favor of its client
1:11:47. This settlement is conditional on the
1:11:56terms of article 478 of the Federal
1:11:59Code of Civil Procedures to be granted
1:12:02to the co-owner. What is the name of
1:12:05the owner?
1:12:07>> Yes, Your Honor. The co-owner is
1:12:09citizen Miguel Ángel Torres Hernández
1:12:12, who obtains 5%of the rights to the
1:12:14property. We are going to grant Miguel
1:12:18Ángel Torres Hernández the right
1:12:20established in article 478 of the
1:12:22Federal Code of Civil Procedures, so
1:12:25that, within a term of 8 days from the
1:12:27date he is notified of the holding of
1:12:30this auction, he may exercise the right
1:12:32of first refusal to acquire the
1:12:34property that is the object of this
1:12:37auction for the amount of 2,90,000
1:12:39pesos, with the understanding that if
1:12:42within that term he does not deposit
1:12:46the amount offered by the plaintiff for
1:12:48being real estate, the corresponding
1:12:50application will be made to the
1:12:52co-owner. Do you agree?
1:12:55>> Okay, Your Honor.
1:12:56>> Well, in these terms, the auction is
1:12:59held. Regarding this file 15, this file
1:13:04TV/al 2021. I will now continue with
1:13:10the auction of file C. You may withdraw
1:13:12. I will now hold the auction of the
1:13:18real estate subject to seizure in file
1:13:22diagonal 2021. Claudia Fernanda Navarro
1:13:25Ríos is present as the attorney for
1:13:29the plaintiff, which is Desarrollos
1:13:32Sociedad Anónima Capital Variable. In
1:13:39terms of article 490 of the Federal
1:13:42Civil Procedure Code, I consider you
1:13:44entitled to offer your client's
1:13:47position.
1:13:49>> Yes, Your Honor, it is my
1:13:50representative's intention to be
1:13:52awarded the property at the value of
1:13:53the legal position. I remind you that
1:13:57in terms of the certificate of
1:14:00recording that is in the file, this, we
1:14:04have, first of all, the recording in
1:14:08favor of the immovable property. The
1:14:13law states that when you are going to
1:14:15acquire an asset that is given in favor
1:14:18of another person who also has a third
1:14:20party creditor, this will do so by
1:14:22acknowledging it himself. Do you agree
1:14:25with that? Yes, of course. We are aware
1:14:28that we are going to be awarded the
1:14:29property with everything and the
1:14:30Recording.
1:14:31>> Very well. In terms of articles 491 and
1:14:35492, I declare your position valid and
1:14:39considering that your representative
1:14:43has a liquid amount of 1,572,861.288
1:14:49pesos. It was declared chopped and
1:14:53awarded in favor of Desarrollos Soción
1:14:57Capital Variable. The real estate
1:14:59object of this auction in the amount of
1:15:02940,666.66 is. 66 in understanding this
1:15:06transfer of ownership that is made, the
1:15:10lien that weighs on the property is
1:15:13understood and that appears registered
1:15:16in the public registry of property. Do
1:15:19you agree?
1:15:21>> Okay, Your Honor. Well, with this we
1:15:23will conclude this collective hearing.
1:15:26This is the last file that was included
1:15:29for its celebration and therefore with
1:15:35this I will ask the citizen secretary
1:15:38to conclude the hearing in the
1:15:40understanding that the parties are
1:15:42notified of the agreements reached in
1:15:45it in terms of article 1390 bis 222 of
1:15:47the Commercial Code without any
1:15:50formality. Likewise, I ask the The
1:15:54secretary certifies the time it
1:15:56concludes and the events that occurred
1:15:59in it to comply with articles 1390 27
1:16:02and 13928 of the game.
1:16:05>> Yes, Your Honor, I took the current
1:16:08auctions and at 11:51 minutes today,
1:16:11August 25, 2023, they are declared
1:16:14concluded and the corresponding video
1:16:17recording is concluded.
1:16:20>> Thank you very much. Starting recording
1:16:22.
1:16:22>> Good morning, everyone. Let me
1:16:24introduce myself. I am Judge Francisco
1:16:26Javier Martínez Briones. I am a
1:16:28commercial oral proceedings judge for
1:16:29the first judicial district in
1:16:32>> Listo. It does not appear there, but
1:16:38here I bring it on a slide. There were
1:16:4222, 21 minutes and 50 seconds. 21
1:16:45minutes. Three auctions grouped into a
1:16:50single collective hearing. And if we
1:16:55reflect a little on the characteristics
1:16:58of these files, I mean, numbers did not
1:17:00come out today for privacy reasons, we
1:17:02replaced the names of the parties, the
1:17:04file numbers and you noticed it said A,
1:17:07B and C, when we know that it
1:17:09corresponds to a number. What is real
1:17:13are the amounts of the auctioned assets
1:17:15, but also the addresses. All the
1:17:17particular data of the parties were
1:17:19suppressed and replaced so that the
1:17:20dynamics of the hearing could be
1:17:22understood. But what is interesting in
1:17:25the reflection that I would like us to
1:17:28make is the different characteristics
1:17:31of the assets in the files and the
1:17:34auctioned assets. If you notice, the
1:17:37first was 100%of the property and the
1:17:40judge, even though the hearing was
1:17:42collective, made sure that the rights
1:17:45and prerogatives of the party, in this
1:17:47case, the executor and the defendant,
1:17:50prevailed. In the second file there was
1:17:55a co-ownership of 5%of the value of the
1:17:59property or of the property of the
1:18:01property, sorry, of the property itself
1:18:03, no, not of the value. And even with
1:18:07that difference, the trial was
1:18:09susceptible to the auction hearing, it
1:18:12was susceptible to being resolved
1:18:14collectively. What did the judge do?
1:18:19what the Constitution mandates, to
1:18:21ensure the rights of the co-owner, who
1:18:24even though they were not present, the
1:18:27judge did not overlook ensuring the
1:18:29exercise of the right of first refusal
1:18:32to be able to make use of it. Even
1:18:37though it was collective, even though
1:18:38due to its characteristics some of us
1:18:40might think, well, you know what? That
1:18:43one can't be, don't put it in
1:18:44collective because it would bring that
1:18:45complication, right? And the third case
1:18:49brought a lien prior to the one being
1:18:52enforced. In other words, I really
1:18:55liked the hearing because it ruled in a
1:18:58very learned way that, even though we
1:19:00might have thought, they wouldn't have
1:19:03to be hearings, in order to settle them
1:19:06collectively, they would have to be all
1:19:09in the same property, without
1:19:11preferential creditors, without
1:19:13co-owners, X, Y, Z; even with those
1:19:15small, well, with those very
1:19:18substantial differences in the
1:19:20characteristics of the assets, of the
1:19:22liens. and the rights that were
1:19:25preferential, it was still possible to
1:19:27discuss them collectively. The length
1:19:30of the video, I'll show you the
1:19:32different parts of it now, but it lasts
1:19:3421 minutes and 50 seconds. It's
1:19:37impressive because it speaks to the
1:19:40efficient use of time, of all of us who
1:19:43operate and participate in the
1:19:45administration of justice: the clients
1:19:48themselves, the lawyers, the parties,
1:19:51formal proceedings, the justice
1:19:53administration body itself, and the
1:19:56opportunity that this type of
1:20:02scheduling gives us when others are not
1:20:05scheduled in a very long or distant
1:20:08manner. So, those are some of the small
1:20:12reflections that I wanted to make
1:20:15quickly. Another thing that I mentioned
1:20:20was important for us to reflect on was
1:20:23the segments that can be discussed
1:20:25simultaneously for all the files and
1:20:28then when to start attending to them
1:20:31individually. There is a section that
1:20:36we call here on the slide transversal
1:20:38or simultaneous for all procedures,
1:20:40where there is a common opening for all
1:20:43participants, there is also a
1:20:45transversal or common certification for
1:20:48all people and all files cited to that
1:20:50collective hearing. And there is a
1:20:55justification that the judge makes for
1:20:57this collective hearing model very
1:21:00specifically, uh, of using the
1:21:02collective hearing as a tool to improve
1:21:05the times in the administration of
1:21:07justice. Well, some time ago I was
1:21:12asked, "Hey, what happened with the
1:21:14appeals, the resources against these
1:21:17types of models?" Well, let me tell you
1:21:20in advance, as I will cover it in a few
1:21:23slides later, that we have analyzed and
1:21:26reflected on 100%of the appeals filed
1:21:28against collective hearings and 100%
1:21:31have been denied. We have surveyed the
1:21:35criteria of the federal authorities
1:21:37when reviewing this strategy, and what
1:21:40we have noticed that the federal judge
1:21:43verifies is that all stages of the
1:21:46hearing are respected, that the use of
1:21:48the voice is allowed and that all
1:21:51participants who have been summoned are
1:21:54given the opportunity to speak; that is
1:21:57, that the hearing has been carried out
1:22:02in all its phases, those that are
1:22:03structured in the law as appropriate,
1:22:05whether they are the elite phase or the
1:22:07execution phase, and that all
1:22:09participants have the opportunity to
1:22:11speak. Well, what we have structured or
1:22:16defined as a tool is this slide. as
1:22:20part of the training as well, and also
1:22:22for our own designated officials. We
1:22:28also have a series of courses for users
1:22:31where we talk about this model of
1:22:33collective hearings and where we
1:22:35explain and have specifically
1:22:37illustrated, as shown in this slide,
1:22:40which things or actions are transversal
1:22:42for all cases and which are
1:22:44individualized. So, for example, in the
1:22:48case of the green column, we can see
1:22:50when the judge has dealt with the
1:22:52specific proceedings that correspond to
1:22:54case A, case B and case C, considering
1:22:59and resolving the particularities that
1:23:01each one of them has. Then, that phase
1:23:07that involved particular attention to
1:23:10each one of them ends, as I mentioned,
1:23:13and then the prosecution or the hearing
1:23:15resumed in a transversal manner for all
1:23:18cases. So, it is something that has
1:23:22greatly favored us in anticipating,
1:23:25from the very moment of receiving the
1:23:27demand, of scheduling the hearing, and
1:23:30knowing what we have to structure and
1:23:33do within the courtroom what we have to
1:23:36do. In preparation for this hearing to
1:23:40be carried out in an efficient manner,
1:23:42just as you all saw in the video shown.
1:23:46Let me provide the following
1:23:48information. Here, during the video,
1:23:52what we were able to see was that the
1:23:55judge uses it only once and does not
1:23:58repeat things in each of the files, the
1:24:02protests, this, that, which he points
1:24:05out when he begins the specific
1:24:08treatment of each one of them. We were
1:24:13also able to see how he moves between
1:24:15the characteristics of the files. In
1:24:17point number four, what particularities
1:24:20did he address in each one of...? Oh,
1:24:22gosh, here...that will be the...Well,
1:24:32anyway, I'll continue here while the
1:24:34colleagues resolve it here: how did he
1:24:36preserve and ensure the exercise of the
1:24:39rights of each of the participants
1:24:41there in the matter of, uh, the part,
1:24:43uh, the procedure where there was
1:24:45co-ownership, where there was a
1:24:47third-party creditor, and so on? So, uh
1:24:53, these types of matters, as I was
1:24:56saying, have this characteristic on the
1:24:58part of the courts, right?, that they
1:25:02group the hearings at a single moment
1:25:04and frees up space. From the scheduling
1:25:08, to be able to reschedule other
1:25:10procedures that, perhaps, due to their
1:25:13nature of complexity and complication,
1:25:16may require or need greater attention
1:25:18from the judge and the staff. That's
1:25:22very good, that leaves the...Yes,
1:25:24that's all there is to it. Well, that's
1:25:29what I just mentioned. That's what I
1:25:32was telling you a few moments ago about
1:25:34the suppression of the particular data
1:25:36or the people who intervened in the
1:25:39hearing. Something interesting there, I
1:25:42don't know if you also noticed the
1:25:44breaks in the audio, it's because we
1:25:46use artificial intelligence to replace
1:25:49the data or the words of those who were
1:25:51speaking. It didn't skip again. If you
1:25:59want to leave it like this, just short.
1:26:01Go to the next one, 19. There what I
1:26:07wanted to represent with you or
1:26:09represent for you was like from minute
1:26:11zero, if you don't open it because it
1:26:13will skip again, that's how we take it.
1:26:15From minute zero. 0 to minute 2 was the
1:26:18general opening for all the files. From
1:26:21minute 2 to minute 13 and a half was
1:26:25the transversal certification. As you
1:26:28can see, it was the most demanding part
1:26:31of the hearing; and then, from minute
1:26:3313 and 5 to 14 and 16 seconds, the
1:26:36justification that the judge made,
1:26:38supported by the Constitution, for
1:26:40using this model. And then, from minute
1:26:4414 and 16 seconds to minute 21, uh, the
1:26:47particular relief of each of the
1:26:49processes, which is what the segment
1:26:52marked there in green. And finally,
1:26:55from minute 21 and 15 seconds to minute
1:26:5821, the closing of the hearing. That's
1:27:01why I took the liberty of putting at
1:27:03the bottom, for greater illustration,
1:27:06the transversal and common part for the
1:27:08files in blue and in green, which
1:27:11represents the time for each of the
1:27:13matters. So the hearing changes scale
1:27:17without losing continuity and follow-up
1:27:20in terms of its relief. Now, help me
1:27:23with the following. Very good. There we
1:27:32have a greater illustration of the
1:27:35transversal acts, the phase, how it was
1:27:39coordinated and how the simultaneous
1:27:42part of the hearings was. I marked the
1:27:47first line of boxes that appears there,
1:27:49which is the presentation, the
1:27:51direction of the hearing, the video
1:27:53recording, the identification of the
1:27:55files and the appearance and protest of
1:27:57the people who attended the hearing.
1:28:01And in the second line, what
1:28:03corresponds to very specific aspects of
1:28:06each of the matters, such as the
1:28:08account of the notifications, the
1:28:11publications of the edicts, the
1:28:13appraisals, the positions and the value
1:28:16of the assets, the liquid amounts and,
1:28:19this, what corresponds to the absence
1:28:22of impediments to hold the hearing. So,
1:28:26we have been scientifically
1:28:28constructing very specifically what
1:28:30happens in a collective hearing to
1:28:33generate operating criteria, service
1:28:36criteria that favor this type of
1:28:38situation. Let's move on to the next
1:28:40one, please. Okay. For us, in terms of
1:28:48the user experience, I think that one
1:28:51point Relevant is the aspect of how the
1:28:55judge justifies or supports having used
1:28:58this strategy. You saw it there when
1:29:03the judge makes his second statement
1:29:05and it is real. In different matters,
1:29:11we have had hearings scheduled outside
1:29:14of what is established by the legal
1:29:16deadlines due to the volume of hearings
1:29:19, the volume of files and this strategy
1:29:22favors more timely rescheduling.
1:29:27Recently, for example, we did an
1:29:29exercise in labor matters where we
1:29:31already had hearings scheduled well
1:29:33beyond the times scheduled or
1:29:35stipulated by the Federal Labor Law.
1:29:39And, by applying these criteria, it
1:29:41gave us the opportunity to do very
1:29:43interesting things: as hearings that we
1:29:45had already scheduled outside of time,
1:29:48we classified them under the model that
1:29:50I just mentioned; we were able to group
1:29:52them into very specific moments of 45
1:29:54minutes, so many of up to 15 hearings
1:29:57due to what I mentioned, right? Some
1:30:00groups had no response, others had a
1:30:03response, the evidence that had been
1:30:05offered did not require the material
1:30:08intervention of the court or matters
1:30:10with exceptions or issues there more.
1:30:13delicate matters to attend to. That
1:30:15scheduled us, it allowed us to reduce
1:30:18waiting times by up to 90 days. So it
1:30:21was a very relevant, very important
1:30:23issue and also, obviously, a relief and
1:30:26an overwhelmer for the court staff, to
1:30:28move forward. In many cases, also for
1:30:32the litigants, because attending a
1:30:34single hearing where all their group of
1:30:37files that they had submitted went,
1:30:39well, it came out in some way more
1:30:41quickly or with greater dynamism. Uh,
1:30:47the next one, please. Well, those are
1:30:50the characteristics of the files that
1:30:51we saw right now. Three files, three
1:30:53different conditions, a single
1:30:55treatment, a single moment. Uh, what
1:30:59was secured only? The adjudication in
1:31:01the case of the first, in the case of
1:31:03the second, the right of first refusal
1:31:06and in the case of the third, the
1:31:08corresponding pronouncements due to the
1:31:10existence of a prior lien. And the next
1:31:13one, please, comply. Uh, I was telling
1:31:19you that we had done and it is a
1:31:21constant monitoring that we have on all
1:31:24the injunctions that have been promoted
1:31:27in all matters against the use of this
1:31:30tool. We closely monitor all
1:31:32constitutional resolutions and the
1:31:35reviews that are made of this model in
1:31:37order to ensure proper monitoring. And
1:31:41we have noticed that what district
1:31:46judges value in order to determine
1:31:48whether or not there was a procedural
1:31:51violation is what, in summary, I have
1:31:53put here on this slide, which is: that
1:31:56the files are identified; that the
1:31:58participants have been verified and
1:32:00also identified; that the possibility
1:32:02of any impediment due to any procedural
1:32:05situation has been ruled out; that the
1:32:07rights of third parties, present or
1:32:10absent at the hearing, are protected
1:32:12and ensured; that the judge has
1:32:16preserved these rights; that the assets
1:32:18are fully differentiated and identified
1:32:20; that a count is made of the
1:32:22requirements necessary to conduct the
1:32:24hearing, such as the existence of
1:32:26notifications to all participants,
1:32:28publication of dictations, etc.;that
1:32:30the use of the voice is allowed as many
1:32:33times as necessary and as requested by
1:32:35the participants in the hearing, their
1:32:37right to participate; and that the
1:32:41judge makes a differentiated decision
1:32:43of the characteristics of each of the
1:32:45processes, as in this case it was. So,
1:32:50uh, that's what we have raised. I mean,
1:32:55we have a, uh, punctual review of all
1:32:57the amparos and there have been no...if
1:32:59there have been amparos, none have been
1:33:01obtained so far, neither in commercial
1:33:04matters, nor in civil matters, nor in
1:33:06family matters, nor in labor matters,
1:33:08nor in the execution phase in the
1:33:10subject of commercial matters. Let's
1:33:14move on to the next one, please. Here I
1:33:19wanted to share with you some
1:33:22reflections on the efficiency of this
1:33:24type of hearings and, uh, to emphasize
1:33:27it or to highlight it, the first of
1:33:30them is that there was less repetition
1:33:36for both the judge and the parties.
1:33:38Imagine protesting, identifying,
1:33:40entering the parties, introducing
1:33:42yourself and so on. Nothing happened
1:33:44for a single moment. uh, the
1:33:47requirement is met. Two, an organized
1:33:51certification. That is to say, when we
1:33:53get into the issue of individualizing
1:33:57the files, yes, being aware of each one
1:33:59of which are involved and their
1:34:01characteristics. Three, the continuity
1:34:04between the stages of the hearing and
1:34:07then when we reach a stage of the
1:34:09hearing where it is necessary to
1:34:11specify or address each of the
1:34:13processes individually. And, uh, well,
1:34:17the fourth, which from the position
1:34:19here of the justice administration
1:34:22operators we call it a block, a usable
1:34:24block, which is what I pointed out at
1:34:26the beginning or somewhere about the
1:34:29beginning, which is what happens with
1:34:31the time that a court or is scheduled
1:34:34for a hearing and, due to the
1:34:35situations that I already mentioned,
1:34:38lack of notifications, that the
1:34:40official letters did not arrive, that
1:34:42the information did not arrive, that
1:34:45the party did not appear and, that time
1:34:48that the judge, the staff and also the
1:34:50attending parties had reserved and
1:34:52dedicated for that is wasted. In the
1:34:56case of the administration plan here,
1:34:59of the courts, well, if two or three
1:35:01files are grouped and even if two of
1:35:04the three have not been able to be
1:35:07resolved with only one that can be
1:35:10completed, there is 100%effectiveness
1:35:13in the time reserved. to handle that
1:35:16hearing. So, uh, it talks about a
1:35:19better use and exploitation of human
1:35:21resources to be able to handle this
1:35:23type of contingency. We'll give you the
1:35:27next one, please. The next one should
1:35:29be this one. Five ideas to take away
1:35:33from this knowledge that we've seen in
1:35:36this session is that it's not a new
1:35:39process, it's simply a strategy to be
1:35:41able to improve the times of
1:35:43administration of justice, to make it a
1:35:46more efficient management of time. Two,
1:35:51that it began with simple trials, those
1:35:54of divorce without cause and then
1:35:56migrated to trials that bring
1:35:58controversy. There are commercial oral
1:36:02trials, there are ordinary civil trials
1:36:04ventilated in this modality of
1:36:05collective hearings. Three, that seeing
1:36:09the possibility of handling them, uh,
1:36:12by analogy in other phases, such as in
1:36:14this case the execution phase, it is
1:36:16also possible to carry out collective
1:36:18hearings. And four, uh, that the
1:36:22hearing must meet these requirements
1:36:25that I've been mentioning of punctually
1:36:28attending the phases of the hearing,
1:36:30the identity of the parties and the
1:36:33individualization of the decision that
1:36:36the judge takes in relation to each of
1:36:39the processes. And fifth, that the
1:36:43legitimacy of this process or this
1:36:45strategy depends a lot on whether the
1:36:48issues have been identified in advance,
1:36:50and whether the route to resolve them
1:36:53has been outlined. That hearing, while
1:36:56it is true that it seemed simple there,
1:36:58three trials, 21 minutes, seven trials,
1:37:007 minutes on average for each of them.
1:37:03Inside the court, it did involve an
1:37:06additional workload to be able to go,
1:37:08uh, to be able to identify them from
1:37:10the moment they are integrated, to
1:37:12identify them as candidates to
1:37:14participate in a collective hearing.
1:37:17That is, from the perspective of the
1:37:19officials, also being aware of the
1:37:21necessary characteristics to be able to
1:37:23group them and take them in that way.
1:37:26And well, let's move on to the next one
1:37:28, please. Uh, well, that's a simple
1:37:33idea. Let's go to the next one. In
1:37:35addition, I wanted to provide some
1:37:37extra content so that you don't just
1:37:40stay with what I came to present to you
1:37:42today, but see that this is a pane to
1:37:45the slide. Next, please, it is not an
1:37:49improvised strategy. As I mentioned at
1:37:55the beginning, it is a strategy
1:37:57analyzed with a scientific methodology
1:37:59that combined the quantitative and
1:38:02qualitative methods of an analysis to
1:38:04validate its effectiveness, its
1:38:06legitimacy. You may ask, but how can
1:38:11the inspectorate then intervene in the
1:38:13situation of the judge's freedom, right
1:38:15? We conducted a thorough review that
1:38:18covered both the qualitative and the
1:38:20quantitative aspects of it. In the
1:38:23quantitative aspects, it was very
1:38:25interesting to be able to compile all
1:38:27the determinations that the federal
1:38:29authorities had made when reviewing the
1:38:32injunctions, and from there we were
1:38:34able to conclude that this is a
1:38:36strategy; that, if these steps that I
1:38:38mentioned earlier are followed, it is a
1:38:40valid strategy in the eyes of the
1:38:42federal authority when reviewing the
1:38:44procedure. It is a book called
1:38:47Collective Hearings, Multiple Trial
1:38:49Hearings, an analysis of an innovative
1:38:50strategy from the perspective of the
1:38:52judicial inspectorate. So we made a
1:38:56compilation, including, of interviews
1:38:58with both officials and, as I said, the
1:39:01plaintiffs, formal and material parties
1:39:04to the trials, and with other
1:39:10institutions that intervene or
1:39:12participate, such as, uh, the Public
1:39:15Prosecutor's Office, the Public
1:39:17Defender's Office, the Civil Registry,
1:39:20for example, uh, in terms of this type
1:39:22of implements and, uh, very specific
1:39:25surveys on whether a collective hearing
1:39:30, to some extent, could cause any harm
1:39:32to any of the participants. For example
1:39:35, we asked and surveyed all users at
1:39:38some point whether their right to
1:39:41participate, their right to express
1:39:44themselves, their right to exercise any
1:39:47argument, prerogative, had been
1:39:50diminished to some extent. And the
1:39:54results of the survey were extremely or
1:39:57highly satisfactory, speaking of 98%
1:40:01satisfaction of the people who
1:40:03participated in a collective hearing
1:40:05and who had also participated in a
1:40:08traditional hearing or one aired or
1:40:10settled individually. So, here is the
1:40:15document, it is a QR code and it
1:40:16directs you to the book in case you
1:40:17want to delve deeper into it. analysis
1:40:19of the information it provides. Uh, it
1:40:22is found on the microsite, I tell you,
1:40:24of the Judicial Branch page. And as for
1:40:27the other part of the information,
1:40:29which we have included next, it
1:40:31concerns the implementation of a new
1:40:33tool that the Judicial Council has
1:40:35introduced in order to also help favor
1:40:37the dynamics of these auctions. In the
1:40:41case of the Judicial Branch of Nuevo
1:40:44León, we have a specialized auction
1:40:46room to conduct auction hearings.
1:40:50Traditionally, this is why the
1:40:51following. It is the microsite and, uh,
1:40:56traditionally, uh, we have...the
1:40:58judicial branches have focused their
1:41:02efforts on preliminary and trial
1:41:05hearings, perhaps renegotiations, uh,
1:41:08where, well, the nature of it is to
1:41:11express arguments, debate points,
1:41:14present evidence and its dynamic is
1:41:18very particular. Here, in the Judicial
1:41:22Branch of Nuevo León, we had the
1:41:23opportunity to develop this auction
1:41:25room. It is a specialized auction room
1:41:29so that the main intervener, which in
1:41:31this case is the bidder, uh,
1:41:33participates in a more dynamic way. If
1:41:36you notice, these are the desks, they
1:41:38are the desks that are in front of the
1:41:40Quez, which is over there in the
1:41:42background, over there on the right
1:41:44side is the secretary and this desk
1:41:46that is here and there is another one
1:41:48in front of it, I don't know if you can
1:41:50see it, which has three stations. On
1:41:54one plane, the plaintiff or executor
1:41:55and the third-party creditor who would
1:41:57like the property to be sold in order
1:41:59to recover the credit are placed. And
1:42:03opposite, in the area where there are
1:42:05no empty spaces, is the defendant,
1:42:07should they attend the hearing, as well
1:42:10as the co-owners, who would also be
1:42:12situated, in some capacity, on the same
1:42:14plane within the hearing, or within the
1:42:17auction proceedings or the sale. And,
1:42:21uh, and in the video that I showed you,
1:42:24well, it is the use of that auction
1:42:27room, but it also has the particularity
1:42:30that one of the bidders attended the
1:42:32hearing electronically. So, that is the
1:42:36information. The truth is that this
1:42:38effort seems very important to me, that
1:42:39it is very important to do this effort.
1:42:40that the Institute of the Judiciary is
1:42:43doing by incorporating this segment
1:42:45into module C, which specifically
1:42:47addresses challenges in the
1:42:49implementation of oral proceedings.
1:42:52Here, it makes a lot of sense to
1:42:54include this topic, since in some way
1:42:58it also raises awareness in the
1:43:00litigating forum, among other users, of
1:43:03the reason for the strategy, its scope
1:43:05and characteristics, I am referring to
1:43:07this strategy of collective hearings.
1:43:10Well, that's all for me. I remain at
1:43:12your service for
1:43:14>> any questions.
1:43:21>> Thank you. We appreciate your valuable
1:43:29presentation, Dr. Roberto Terño Ramos.
1:43:33We now open the round of questions,
1:43:35also acknowledging and thanking the
1:43:37doctor for his willingness to answer
1:43:38the concerns of the group. Due to
1:43:42scheduling issues, I will immediately
1:43:48allow myself to ask you a question that
1:43:51came to us from a distance, but Doctor,
1:43:54if it seems right to you, you could
1:43:57>> also ask. Yes, the lawyer there was
1:44:00going to ask a question at the
1:44:01beginning.
1:44:04>> Yes, right, Lin? Yes, but this was in
1:44:10the sense of the subject of injunctions
1:44:12, but this one was left out somehow. He
1:44:16answered with what he told us regarding
1:44:18the criteria of the federal authority.
1:44:20So that's it. Thank you very much.
1:44:22>> Excellent. To your.
1:44:24>> Thank you.
1:44:27>> Uh,
1:44:27>> another one. Yes. There, Mauricio. Go
1:44:30ahead.
1:44:34>> Yes. Good afternoon, teacher. Regarding
1:44:38the cases that were made in the
1:44:41hearings, uh, if you could enlighten us
1:44:44in the sense, there, I don't remember
1:44:47if it was ABC of which one, right? But
1:44:52in one, 95%was awarded, of which the
1:44:56right of first refusal was to be given
1:44:58to the one who has 5%. More so, if you
1:45:03can specify, for some who are not
1:45:05familiar with it, or maybe to enlighten
1:45:07me as well, in the understanding that
1:45:09it is only about the right of first
1:45:11refusal on 95, so that the same one who
1:45:14has 5%, well, he exercises it or not.
1:45:18But even so, if he does not exercise it
1:45:21, that 5%of that person is respected
1:45:23and tomorrow they have to sue that
1:45:26person again for that 5%because not
1:45:29that co-owner. Go. Okay, if you could
1:45:31enlighten us a little bit, please.
1:45:33>> Uh, just clarify the terms of the
1:45:35question because I
1:45:36>> mixed it up.
1:45:37>> Okay.
1:45:38>> Uh, 95%went to auction.
1:45:42>> Yes.
1:45:43>> There is another person who is the
1:45:44co-owner who has 5%. He will be given
1:45:47the right of first refusal, he will be
1:45:49notified whether or not he can
1:45:50>> buy the 95%that he is missing in 8 days
1:45:53.
1:45:53>> Exactly. If he doesn't buy it, the one
1:45:56who has 95%will not keep the 5%.
1:45:59>> Oh, another one.
1:46:00>> No, the lawsuit was not against him.
1:46:02>> Exactly. So, that's what I'm getting at
1:46:03. From there, it would be an
1:46:05independent lawsuit against him. It's
1:46:08>> another action. Exactly. What's more,
1:46:10if those who do not have knowledge of
1:46:13>> the property have no ownership rights.
1:46:16In that case, what happened was the
1:46:19sale of the 95%that was owned by the
1:46:22co-owner, debtor and natural defendant
1:46:25in that proceeding. To dissolve the
1:46:32co-ownership is another procedure, it
1:46:34is a civil procedure, it is another
1:46:36action, it is aired in another way and
1:46:38there the co-owner will be sued, right?
1:46:42That 5%will be another type of elements
1:46:44that the one who wants to keep the
1:46:46other part will have to demonstrate
1:46:48because he has not said it either,
1:46:49right? I mean, it is a situation, right
1:46:53? He has not told her that he would
1:46:56like to buy the other 5%, right? I mean
1:46:58, that is something completely
1:47:00different, right?
1:47:01>> Well, finally, thank you. And in turn,
1:47:04in another of the ABCs there was one
1:47:06that had an embargo in the first place.
1:47:10Yes,
1:47:11>> normally I think my colleague tells me,
1:47:15normally in auctions an amount is
1:47:19respected for the first place and
1:47:22degree. There the judge did say
1:47:26something in the auction about that
1:47:31amount. Oh, it is that the bidder made
1:47:34a statement there and said, "I'll take
1:47:36it." So there it is, the annotation and
1:47:38the lien will be taken. There was no
1:47:40need to make the statement. I wasn't
1:47:42asking for it to be dismissed. He would
1:47:46then exercise his liquidations of the
1:47:48principal, the accessories and so on
1:47:50and he would tell him what I had in my
1:47:52other lawsuit because of my attraction
1:47:54to that third-party creditor, but at
1:47:56least at that time what he did was take
1:47:58it. No, no, there was no need to
1:48:01liquidate it.
1:48:02>> Yes, it's like you say, now they're
1:48:04going to fight between the two of them,
1:48:05not with the debtor. Well, in the case
1:48:07of the third-party creator, well, he
1:48:09brings his balance, his balance secured
1:48:11with the annotation.
1:48:13>> Let's put it this way: sometimes in, if
1:48:15we go back to the theory, well, it's
1:48:17the real right that he was granted by
1:48:19having taken out a credit with a real
1:48:22guarantee to which, in this case it was
1:48:24the Info...(I don't know what name we
1:48:26put there so that it wouldn't sound the
1:48:28same, but you know that at the end of
1:48:31the day it's the) Infonavid, this one
1:48:33that would have really insured the
1:48:35amount of his credit with that marginal
1:48:37annotation. Then they liquidate it and
1:48:39determine that the principal amount
1:48:41plus the accessories is such a quantity
1:48:43if this bidder wants to free themselves
1:48:47from any burden that weighs on the
1:48:50property. Yes, those are basically the
1:48:52two approaches.
1:48:53>> Thank you.
1:48:53>> Yes, and also thank you for the
1:48:55question because in a way it gives the
1:48:57opportunity to expand the presentation.
1:49:00Note that in what you mentioned, I
1:49:02would invite you, I don't know if the
1:49:04participation I had in the previous one
1:49:06in the diploma course on the National
1:49:08Code of Civil and Family Procedures.
1:49:11There I had to collaborate precisely
1:49:13with the execution of the sentences and
1:49:15with the auction with the new scenarios
1:49:17that the National Code brings. So, if
1:49:20it is public, you can consult it on the
1:49:23website of the Institute of the
1:49:25Judiciary. There it is. Just like this
1:49:28recording, uh, you can find that one
1:49:30there too. And we talked extensively
1:49:33about all the figures that exist in the
1:49:37auction topic, such as defining what an
1:49:41auction means, to the currency, bidder,
1:49:45bidder, value, commercial value,
1:49:48appraisal value, legal position, all
1:49:51the effects that exist there with the
1:49:55owner, all the assumptions. But here I
1:49:59wanted to focus very specifically on
1:50:01the issue of the characteristics of the
1:50:03collective hearing; but we already
1:50:05addressed that in a very detailed way,
1:50:07including the doctrine, about the
1:50:09different aspects and subjects that
1:50:11participate in the auction. And we even
1:50:14criticize it, as I mentioned, you can
1:50:16find it in the memoirs, right? In the
1:50:18memoirs of the,
1:50:20>> uh, there is a book that the Council of
1:50:22the Judiciary edited with the support
1:50:24of the Institute of the Judiciary of
1:50:26that diploma. There is a compendium of
1:50:29memoirs, there you can see the
1:50:30reflections of all the participants.
1:50:34And if anyone is interested in delving
1:50:36deeper into this part of the process or
1:50:38the administration of justice, which is
1:50:41when the litigants actually see
1:50:43everything we did in the process
1:50:45consummated, right? When the lawsuit,
1:50:48the response, the hearings, the
1:50:50judgment, but the plaintiff, let's say
1:50:53materially, is when they really see it
1:50:55consummated, right? In an auction, in a
1:50:58bidding process. So there we make some
1:51:02reflections and some considerations,
1:51:04including areas of opportunity that we
1:51:07saw in the legislation, in the National
1:51:09Code to, uh, supply or fill some
1:51:11situations that we have noticed in
1:51:14practice. Very good. Very good. It's
1:51:19called Memoirs of the Diploma.
1:51:21>> Yes. Uh, exactly. Memoirs of that first
1:51:24diploma.
1:51:25>> Yes. It's from another diploma, right?
1:51:29It's not from this one properly, that
1:51:31one is from the National Code, it's on
1:51:33the microsite. You google the Judicial
1:51:36Branch website and type in Editorial
1:51:38Coordination, and there you will see
1:51:39all the documents that the Judicial
1:51:41Branch has edited and. There is one
1:51:44called...you will see about 130 or 140
1:51:46documents, and there is one called "
1:51:48Memories of the Diploma of the National
1:51:50Code of Civil and Family Procedures".
1:51:54>> Thank you. Uh, I will move on to a
1:51:56question on Zoom. It says, "Could there
1:51:58be a violation of the Federal Law on
1:52:00the Protection of Personal Data Held by
1:52:02Private Parties and the General Law on
1:52:04Personal Data Held by Obligated
1:52:06Subjects?"
1:52:07>> Oh, I imagine I will expand on the
1:52:09question a little more because I think
1:52:11it goes in that direction. It is due to
1:52:14the fact that several people
1:52:15participated in the same hearing,
1:52:17>> in a collective hearing. That would be
1:52:19the meaning. Uh, well, hearings are
1:52:22public. Yes, any of us goes to a
1:52:25courthouse and sees the hearing and can
1:52:28be present at the moment it is being
1:52:31held. Uh, there is no data breach there
1:52:35. This one, you can see who bids, who
1:52:39bids, how much they bid, how many times
1:52:41, how many rounds there are. In other
1:52:43words, that is not something that has
1:52:49not been aired, that does not violate,
1:52:52that violates, sorry, the secrecy of
1:52:55the parties. That happens every day. I
1:53:01would like to expand on the information
1:53:03a little more and invite you, for
1:53:05example, in the case of our institution
1:53:07here, and I say this with great pride
1:53:10and satisfaction, we have an incredible
1:53:12number of laboratories for the academic
1:53:14forum, for those who want to continue
1:53:16preparing. This auction room that I
1:53:20showed you has a public area where you
1:53:22do not need to identify yourself, make
1:53:24an appointment, or do anything else.
1:53:27They simply arrive, sit down and
1:53:29witness and witness as a society the
1:53:32compliance with the application of the
1:53:34law. This is in the building where our
1:53:41civil and concurrent jurisdiction
1:53:43courts are located. There are two oral
1:53:47trial rooms, two auction rooms. In
1:53:51addition, as if that were not enough,
1:53:54and it could be useful for any student
1:53:57at any level who wants to witness an
1:54:00auction, they can go and there is even
1:54:03the entire week's agenda on the screen.
1:54:09They can also attend and witness an
1:54:11auction, but remotely. Anywhere in the
1:54:16world, a user can create a user account
1:54:18of our tool called the Virtual Court.
1:54:23They enter the agenda of scheduled
1:54:25hearings of any nature, except those
1:54:27that are restricted due to family
1:54:29matters, for example, or some crimes in
1:54:31criminal matters, some specific crimes
1:54:34in criminal matters, and create a user
1:54:36account. In that case, you must enter
1:54:40your identification details and you can
1:54:42witness on the screen a hearing while
1:54:45it is taking place. We do not keep them
1:54:48in a collection that you can consult
1:54:50from previous dates or earlier times;
1:54:52it is simply the live broadcast of a
1:54:54hearing that is currently being held.
1:54:58There are conditions such as not
1:55:00photographing it, not videotaping it,
1:55:02not downloading it, etc. This is a very
1:55:04useful laboratory for those who are
1:55:06studying or who have never or have
1:55:09already completed that degree. Many of
1:55:12us, I am sure that perhaps we have
1:55:14never had the need to take a trial to
1:55:16the auction stage, but the day that it
1:55:18is my turn, well, perhaps I want to
1:55:19know what the dynamics are, how it
1:55:21works. There I can witness, testify and
1:55:25prepare myself in practice for how an
1:55:28auction hearing works, including those
1:55:31collective characteristics. Very well,
1:55:36>> we appreciate the contributions and
1:55:38experiences shared by our speaker,
1:55:40therefore, on behalf of the Judicial
1:55:42Branch of the State, a well-deserved
1:55:44recognition is given to him for his
1:55:46participation, which literally says: "
1:55:48The Judicial Branch of the State of
1:55:50Nuevo León, through the Institute of
1:55:52the Judiciary, grants this recognition
1:55:54to Dr. Roberto Treviño Ramos for his
1:55:56brilliant dissertation on the topic:"
1:55:59Collective auction hearings ", of
1:56:00module 5," Commercial oral justice,
1:56:03advances and current challenges ".
1:56:06Monterrey, Nuevo León, September 28,
1:56:082026" Professor José Antonio
1:56:10Gutiérrez Flores, General Director of
1:56:12the Institute of the Judiciary of the
1:56:14Judicial Branch of the State of Nuevo
1:56:16León. With this dissertation, we
1:56:28conclude the update diploma in
1:56:30commercial procedural law, hoping that
1:56:33all the modules and their topics have
1:56:35been of great interest and also that
1:56:37each of the presentations have been
1:56:39able to leave you with information,
1:56:42reflections and conclusions that are
1:56:44pertinent and very useful for your
1:56:46personal training and professional
1:56:48development, as well as the interest in
1:56:51continuing your training in the legal
1:56:53discipline, particularly commercial
1:56:57procedural law. All that remains for me
1:57:01to do is congratulate you and express
1:57:03our most sincere gratitude for having
1:57:06accompanied us throughout 15 class
1:57:09sessions in person or remotely, hoping
1:57:11to meet again in many other courses of
1:57:14the Institute of the Judiciary of the
1:57:17State of Nuevo León. And an additional
1:57:21note. We remind you that it is
1:57:24important to answer the closing
1:57:26evaluation and take the exam
1:57:28corresponding to module 5 from today,
1:57:31September 28, to October 4. Have a
1:57:34great afternoon and evening. Thank you
1:57:38very much. And they shared some
1:57:43information with me here, doctor,
1:57:46graduates, that has to do with the
1:57:49publication. It's called The New Civil
1:57:51and Family Justice, Challenges and
1:57:53Perspectives of the National Code. This
1:57:56is the information we referred to a
1:57:59moment ago. Thank you very much.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Diplomado de Actualización en Derecho Procesal Mercantil by Instituto de la Judicatura, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 12,954 words across 2,052 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.