This Thursday a district judge refused to accept to process the amparo lawsuit, promoted by La Polar, against the closure of the establishment. Cuauhtémoc Mayor’s Office and Administrative Verification Institute (INVEA).
The closure was ordered after a diner, identified as Antonio Montoya, died on January 8. beat up local employees As he claimed excessive charges on the account.
The judge said, “From a full reading of the claims brief, irregularities are noted that prevent admission to processing in accordance with the requirements set out in Articles 108 and 110, second paragraph, of the Amparo Law.”
Irregularities found by the judge included the fact that La Polar’s lawyer claimed that he was participating in the amparo test on behalf of the company and on his own behalf, to which the judge said that “the reason he said The person (lawyer) can promote this amparo proceeding”.
Another inconsistency is that in the Amparo petition, the Cuauhtémoc mayor’s office and INVEA were held as responsible authorities, to which the same functions of authority have been attributed.
The judge questioned this position, as he assured that it was clear that all (officers) cannot act equally.
“Deriving from the foregoing, a situation has been pointed out which prevents constitutional litigation from being established, because the complainant fails to indicate, in particular, what are the acts which are specifically claimed to have been committed by each of the authorities. go,” he said.
The judge also pointed out that, in the application for amparo, the applicant “failed” to state whether the request for closure “arises from any criminal proceedings which have been opened because of the alleged death of the person mentioned in the initial application brief”. “.
Judge asked to explain, under oath to tell the truth, the manner and date by which he came to know about the act Intends to claim in this constitutional precedent. Nor is it taken into account that the complaining party.
According to the notice, the judge requested To clarify all these points, La Polar’s lawyer, To analyze whether the amparo is justified, to decide whether it is accepted for processing.