Index

Introduction
I. The arbitration award
A. Approval and implementation in the Mexican Republic.
II. Amparo
A. Origin of the protection against the procedure of recognition or enforcement
III. Analysis of Grupo Radio Centro vs event. Infor.
IV. Conclusion

Introduction
. In Mexico, the culture of arbitration is not sufficiently widespread, even tho
ugh the same law accepts the recognition and enforcement of awards issued abroad
, among other things, thanks to which Mexico is part of the New York Convention
on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958. On the other
hand Mexico is also part of the Montevideo Convention (Inter-American Conventio
n on Extraterritorial Validity of Foreign Judgments and Arbitral Awards) to whic
h Mexico is reserved in the implementation of economic decisions. In turn, Mexic
o is also part of the Panama Convention (Inter-American Convention on Internatio
nal Commercial Arbitration), which is very important to the topic at hand becaus
e Article 5 sets out the conditions for refusing recognition and enforcement of
an award abroad. Everything indicates that the only important arbitration agreem
ent that Mexico is not part of the Washington Convention on the Settlement of In
vestment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States which if it was i
mproper or not, is outside the scope of this study work but note that Mexico has
a lot of Bilateral Reciprocal Protection of Investment which could be understoo
d to remedy the absence of the Washington Convention.
In the first chapter, we discuss the award and how to be approved before a judge
for later execution (self-enforceability) in Mexico. During the course of this
work will discuss some provisions of Title IV of Book V of the Commercial Code r
elating to commercial arbitration, particularly those related to invalidity, rec
ognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. It also will study the way how the
judges should be subject to arbitration awards study the restriction of not stud
ying the merits of the case, ie should deal only judicial decision of invalidity
or recognition, based on procedural considerations set out in articles 1462 Sec
tion I of the Commercial Code or unless they detect a violation of public policy
provisions or subject to arbitration is something that is not susceptible to be
arbitrable as we mentioned in Article 1462 Section II of the Commercial Code.
In the second chapter, we will see what is under implementation in the field of
arbitration.
In the third and final chapter will an analysis of case against Infored Grupo Ra
dio Centro, besides the account of it in the words of journalist Jose Gutierrez
Vivo, Infor and winner of the arbitration process.
The aim of this paper is first to analyze the judicial intervention in arbitral
proceedings, notably the place of the injunction and its interaction with the fi
eld of arbitration. Also this will help us discover tangentially Mexican courts'
position on international commercial arbitration, to understand if we are withi
n a jurisdiction for or against it, and how functional use in both Mexico and by
the way court can interfere with the arbitral proceedings or enforcement of an
award.
I. The arbitration award
It is important to first mention that, in my opinion, arbitration is a form of "
private justice". That is roughly two parties entering into an agreement or cont
ract, for whatever reason (either by increased speed, confidence in domestic cou
rts, complexity of subject matter, among others), to submit to a body of experts
(may be one or three usually the latter called peer) any dispute or conflict, p
resent or future arising by reason of their contractual relationship.
For this reason, it is a form of justice outside the public courts, the only for
ce of validity that has the final decision, which is called the award, is one th
at both parties give to translate their desire in the arbitration agreement (arb
itration agreement it may be a specific clause in a contract or a separate docum
ent.)
Yet to make the issue more complex, it is that when a dispute is submitted to ar
bitration during these procedures may have judicial intervention. Justification
of this is found in Article 1422 of the Commercial Code provides that where judi
cial intervention is required shall have jurisdiction in the federal trial judge
or the common order of the place where the arbitration takes place.
A. Approval and Enforcement of Awards in Mexico
When we speak of the arbitration law in Mexico, we refer to Title IV of Part V o
f the Commercial Code, which states in Chapter IX concerning the recognition and
enforcement of an arbitration award, which is considered to be binding and then
brought before a judge may request in writing, shall be effective implementatio
n.
When entering Mexico to New York Convention and Panama, referred to in the first
paragraph of the introduction of this document, these conventions became part o
f our domestic law reforms which caused commercial code article 1462 being as fo
llows:
"It just may refuse recognition or enforcement of an arbitral award, irrespectiv
e of the country in which it has issued, where:
I. - The party against whom the order is invoked, try before the competent court
of the country in calling for the re knowledge or execution:
a) A party in the arbitration agreement was under some incapacity, or the said a
greement is not valid under the law to which the parties have subjected it or an
ything if is not specified in this regard, Under the law of the country where th
e award was made;
b) was not properly notified of the appointment of an arbitrator or the arbitral
proceedings or was unable, for any other reason, to assert their rights;
c) The decision referred to a dispute not contemplated by the arbitration agreem
ent or contains decisions on matters beyond the terms of the arbitration. Howeve
r, if the award provisions relating to the matters submitted to arbitration can
be separated from those not, may be recognized and enforced first;
d) The composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was not ad
justed to the agreement between the parties or, failing such agreement, which di
d not conform to the law of the country where the arbitration took place, or
e) The award has not yet become binding on the parties or has been revoked or su
spended by the judge in the country in which, or under whose law has been given
the award, or
II .- The court finds that, under Mexican law, the subject of the dispute is not
arbitrable, or enforcement of awards recognition or contrary to public policy.
This sets the tone for us to know that an ordinary judge is empowered to examine
what causes give rise to the revocation or denial in the execution of an award
in arbitration. However, the substantive issues of how we got to it, and any res
ponsibility of the referees is outside the limits of that authority, since the p
arties agreed to resolve their differences in an arbitral panel by free will and
complete them before the judicial authority is against the above. (Ruiz, 2000)
The process for recognition of an award issued abroad for its eventual implement
ation system known as "enforceability" and the process to enforce it and run is
called "enforcement procedure." (Silva, 2001)
The Commercial Code provides in Article 1463 that an arbitration award will be r
ecognized or enforced without the resolution may be subject to appeal and the pr
ocedure for recognition or enforcement shall be dealt with according incidentall
y 360 of the Federal Code of Civil Procedure that the letter reads as follows:
"Promoted the incident, the judge sent the notification to the other party, by t
he end of three days. Expiry of that term, if the parties fail to promote eviden
ce and the court is deemed necessary, will be quoted for in the three days follo
wing the hearing of allegations, which are verified or not the parties. If testi
ng is promoted, or the court deems necessary, will open a delay of 10 days proba
tion and verify the hearing in the manner mentioned in Chapter V of Title I this
book. "
The fact that enforcement proceedings against the award or recognition does not
carry any legal action does not imply that the protection is inappropriate as de
scribed below:

II. Amparo
Jorge Gabriel García Rojas, renowned jurist as defined under:
"The special courts to be brought before the federal courts for the annulment of
an act of authority or the failure of a law violates the constitutional rights
of individuals, either by direct contempt of the constitution or the abuse of an
y lower standard "(Jesus, 2002)
In the United Mexican States, the legislation provides for two types of applicat
ion of protection: the direct and indirect, the first, under Article 158 of the
Amparo Act, is related to a sentence whose character is definite, that is; that
in order to prosecution.
When we talk in indirect jurisdiction, under Article 114 of the Amparo Act appli
es are talking about acts of judicial power court or administrative work which h
ad been executed once the court or outside it.
A. Origin of the protection against the procedure of recognition or enforcement.
It is important to note that although section 1463 of the Commercial Code provid
es that the process of recognition or enforcement may not be subject to legal re
course, this does not prevent the Amparo is appropriate, since in the strict sen
se is Amparo legal recourse.
In Article 73 of the Amparo Act are deemed unfounded causes also called Fair Jud
gement. While an arbitral tribunal is not authority for defense purposes in that
article did not find any grounds to tell us that the injunction suit can not pr
oceed against the procedure of recognition or enforcement. Now, define whether t
he protection from the direct or indirect subject of debate and court production
as I mention below.
The jurisprudential argument supporting the appropriateness of indirect jurisdic
tion are:
"When you claim trial guarantees approved an award of agreements aimed at declar
ing and implementing acts in relation to it is from indirect appeal hearing befo
re federal judges, aware of what is available about the article 114, Section III
, second paragraph, under the law because the complexity of the same events that
are not being challenged in the case of one final decision that the award is ap
proved, to claim on direct relief, signaling under Article 158 of the same Code.
"
"... However, judges are not authorized to review the award in a comprehensive w
ay, because otherwise they can unify, even for matters of substance, so it will
be necessary before the parties appeared before the judge to refer to the debate
, The system usually adopted is that if the violation contained in the award vio
lates public order, the judge must order his execution but only undermines priva
te interests must order it, and once judicially decreed compliance rises to the
level of court action and it is then that the victim may occur before the federa
l courts to demand protection, which must be dealt with bi-instancial road ... "
"The resolution declaring the nullity of an arbitral award is not a final ruling
for the purposes of the origin of the direct protection and who has been approv
ed, but in any case, this is the last decision rendered in interlocutory proceed
ings heard before the jurisdictional authority, which is comparable to the cases
provided in section III of Article 114 of the law for protection. Under these c
onditions, the award is the culmination of the proceedings in a trial, the decis
ion on the motion for dismissal on to be regarded as an act performed outside th
e trial and, therefore, the decision rendered this incident, by comparison, cons
titutes the final decision in the arbitration proceedings which culminated in a
judicial stage in which approval is sought or the annulment of the award. For al
l the above, updated course from which the indirect appeal provisions of that Ar
ticle 114, Section III "
"In a legal sense generic, incident is any event that occurs incidentally during
 the course of the proceedings, and keep a more or less immediately to the princ
ipal object in its trial stages regular incident, only that shorten the time and
terms. However, against the proceedings is incidental to substantiate a dispute
is subject to annulment of an award or recognition and enforcement, it should b
e noted that this matter itself is different from the main elucidated in the arb
itration. So that should be considered that both the recognition and enforcement
of an award as invalid claims are nouns and proper finality, which are both pos
itive or negative reflection of the same cause and hypotheses by which to have w
ould come in the execution of an award , declares its invalidity could recognize
and manage their implementation. According to former although Article 1460 of t
he Commercial Code refers to a range 360 of the Federal Code of Civil Procedure,
incidentally to substantiate the request for annulment of the award, the perspe
ctive must be taken in respect of the legal nature of an award. ... There is a r
eal possibility and this practice make a ruling that prevented another in the fo
reseeable future and would become more effective to achieve the final court deci
sion is the implementation of the excluded side, all in a single resolution in i
ndirect relief claimable incidental. "
With respect to the jurisprudential argument supporting the appropriateness of d
irect protection, the arguments are:
"Article 1460 of the Commercial Code refers to the incident referred to in Artic
le 360 the Federal Code of Civil Procedure for the processing of the action for
annulment of an award, but that does not have incident substantially, since taki
ng his goal solve for primary source is invalid presidential award, we can concl
ude that the procedure in question, both materially and formally, has the nature
of the trial, understood as the field procedure is the main action, with the ai
m to obtain satisfaction legally protected interest through a judicial decision
... The decision of what to say in substance, constitutes a final decision, rega
rding which, if no appeal in terms of the provisions in the final part of Articl
e 1460 the Commercial Code, is challenged by direct protection ... "
"While Article 1460 of the Commercial Code provides that the invalidity shall be
dealt with incidentally raised, so is the correct insight that can be seen that
this is not an accident, under which only refers to the way how be substantiate
d as a process ... however, the revocation proceedings is the main sequel, becau
se it seeks a substantive decision on the invalidity claimed, what material and
legal means trial by proper nouns, ie, not dependent on another main proceedings
character or resolve disputes adjective, moreover, that has stages that make up
a trial ... therefore, the resolution is decided on the merits, or ends, amenab
le to direct relief ... "
III. Analysis of the case against Infored Grupo Radio Centro
The contract made and Infored Grupo Radio Centro, in the year 1998, specified th
at it was a "contract for the provision of news production, education programs a
nd special events" and it was specified that any dispute would be resolved throu
gh arbitration proceedings and rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (M
exico, 1999). This document sets out how that would be integrated the arbitral t
ribunal:
"The arbitration proceedings shall be before three neutral arbitrators in accord
ance with the provisions below. Radio and center conductor arbitrator appointed
monitor in the morning and report to designate award within 15 days after the la
st appointment of the first two. The arbitrators among themselves shall appoint
the arbitrator who will act as chief judge, within five days from the date of th
e last their designations. If any appointment of arbitrators is not between the
time limits set, the CIC designation that the request of any party. Referees sho
uld be able to read, write, and start with ease in both English and Spanish and
must be skilled in the art in question "
Only four years after signing, Infored decides to terminate the same, claiming b
reach of previously agreed, asking others to pay outstanding debts, proceeding w
ith arbitration before the International Chamber of Commerce, claiming the previ
ously described (University of California , 2004).
The two companies proceeded to appoint their arbitrators, and even radio center
group emphasized that the arbitrator "qualifies as agreed in the arbitration" an
d the absence of any claim as to the arbitrators and the manner in which the cou
rt was arbitration, arbitration followed its normal course. (Rueda, 2008)
The award for Infor was the year of 2004, but requested a Grupo Radio Centro inc
idental to the nullity 63 º civil judge of the Superior Court of Justice of the Fe
deral District which found that it was zero. Both parties claimed an indirect ap
peal against that decision (Fundación Manuel Buendía (Mexico), 2005) her.
That court overturned the award by applying Article 1457, first fraction, subsec
tion d) of the Commercial Code (Lamadrid, 2002). Which states:
"Arbitration awards can only be annulled by the competent court if:
The party seeking to prove that action:
d) The composition of the arbitral proceedings the arbitral tribunal did not lik
e the agreement between the parties ... "
Grupo Radio Centro stated that arbitrators are not experts in the field, since t
hey had not appointed experts in contention in matters relating to the radio and
accounting.
In the fifth paragraph of the decision dated November 10, 2004, issued the file
number 645/04, followed by Grupo Radio Centro against Jose Elias Gutierrez Vivo
and others, that court made the following account:
"Having a vision of an award (...) shows that the composition of the arbitral tr
ibunal is not attached to the twenty-eighth clause clause (ii) and which literal
ly states that the referees should be experts in this field on significant issue
s for his letter that if the conclusion of a contract to provide news production
services, education programs and special events must be inhabited by specialize
d lawyers specialize in communication and media, which does not happen in this b
usiness because observed to be appointed jurists distinguished and integrated in
to three the number of arbitral tribunal "
One year after the Sixth District Court in Civil Matters in the Federal District
, the two judgments under review, giving Infor. This led to Grupo Radio Centro t
o file a petition for review and revision counterpart adhesive (Aranda, 2007). T
he Thirteenth Court on Civil Matters of the First Circuit, in reviewing both rej
ected the ruling of the previous paragraph, since it considered that the resolut
ion that ended the appeal for annulment of an arbitral award should be considere
d a final statement also grant under both exclusively by parties for costs (Méndez
, 2008).
In the third recital of the designated court ruling dated May 12, 2005, on page
101 is reproduced:
"Any disagreement of the parties relating to the alleged lack of expertise of th
e arbitrators to resolve the dispute under its authority must be raised during t
he arbitral proceedings, serving as appropriate, to specific rules on how much t
ime and manner provided for arbitration rules ... "
Infored, then proceeds with an appeal for review of direct amparo before the Sup
reme Court of Justice of the Nation, which were referred to the Court by the App
ellate Court (Chapa, 2006). The allegation in this case was whether the invalidi
ty of the award was a final decision for purposes of protection and then proceed
with a direct defense, or vice versa because of the legal nature of the resolut
ion was declared invalid and the arbitration itself, came from a indirect amparo
(Araizaga, 2007).
The Supreme Court's Office returned the case to the appellate court, ruling that
the applicable indirect appeal against a decision rendered in an incident of an
award, on June 11, 2008 (Fuentes, 2008) the court then granted an injunction to
Infor, validating the arbitration award.
The first Chamber of the Supreme Court of the nation unanimously denied the writ
of amparo to Grupo Radio Centro, and the final decision requiring him to pay In
fored, was released on September 10, 2010, six years after arbitral award has be
en made (El Universal, 2010).
Laura Patricia Rojas Zamudio, Department of Survey and the First Court has told
the media that:
"First, modify the sentence in the terms used in the final recital in this resol
ution; Second, Justice of the Union does not cover or protect with Grupo Radio C
entro public stock corporation with variable capital by Grupo Radio Centro Socie
dad Anonima de Capital Variable against of acts that have been recorded in the r
esulting second of this resolution, report "
In this regard Gutierrez Vivo, of Infored comment on the above, in an interview
on the radio program of journalist Carmen Aristegui, the following:
"When any group or groups of people ... and this has happened in the life of the
world, are usually interest in monetary and political times, they decide to rem
ove someone, well, not only decide what they can do as a group to do, but also d
evelop what is known commonly as dull but effective campaign to discredit him, b
ecause it allows them to have several clips to achieve a goal which of course in
origin has been shown for many years, it is absolutely clear, I have wanted to
make the basis of rumors, based on people has written for them, surely they have
had agreements in order to make people read something or hear in passing and he
said Carmen, but we had all the time or something that goes on TV possible, but
we do not have the true picture ... "
The journalist, says as you enter the December 1, 1972 to the company Radio Prog
rams Mexico, Serna family, after having studied and solved their expenses on the
ir own work on the BBC in London, England. In 1973, the company decides to stay
with his two most important stations (one of amplitude modulation and a frequenc
y modulation) to which appointed Grupo Radio Network, which in turn are sold to
Grupo Radio Centro in 1995.
Gutierrez Vivo accused, he was not informed about the transaction cited above an
d that the interference of the new owners, the Aguirre family, the contents of t
he programs carried out in 1998, the bank to announce its withdrawal from the ra
dio station by Because of the way of saying that calls "a fish can not swim with
out water" referring to the lack of freedom in the information handled. He promi
ses a change of guidelines as to what previously mentioned, however comes the ye
ar two thousand, and the situation continued in the same way.
Asking for government support for then-Secretary of the Interior to act as media
tor between the two parties, which the owners of the broadcaster, agreed to chan
ge the so called because the journalist "abuses against them," but did not fulfi
ll the promises, and initiated the arbitration process, as had been agreed, to s
ettle any differences that arose.
The Court in which the arbitration took place, was the court in the city of Pari
s, France, which is part of the United Nations. Such arbitration, took two years
, from 2002 to 2004, during which time appoint two arbitrators Mexican nationali
ty certificates in March, Infored, is informed of the decision in his favor in t
he process.
Grupo Radio Centro, on its Web site and phone into the air, Gutierrez Vivo's own
mention, they will do everything possible not to pay, even admit to having lost
the arbitration. In addition, the pair of these statements, the journalist and
his team are dismissed as the same comments:
"In other work, the worker called and told the reason for his dismissal, on radi
o, just enough to lower a black lever is in a booth and let you off the air, qui
te simply, no longer exist ... This did the March 3, 2004 at 1:01 "
In addition, says Gutierrez Vivo, which lowered the wages they were 25% (asking
the same pace and quality of work) and that they had been working as a duty of M
arch and the last. Joaquin Vargas Guajardo, MVS will offer works for the consort
ium, which I accept and began broadcasting from, but a day before the inaugurati
on of Felipe Calderón, gets a call from Maximiliano Cortazar, where he reports tha
t will "punished" for presidential management cited above, plus it would be obse
rved to behave "well" and if so the President, talk to him, although he was not
told that.
In their relationship with the current president, says that he always kept his d
istance, although the relationship was cordial and had accompanied him on some t
rips to their work schedule, even mentions that the last interview he gave in th
e range that marks the law for the presidential campaigns conducted in the radio
program, where, prior to transmission, it showed him documentation and award pr
oceedings against Grupo Radio Centro (see page by page over a period of twenty m
inutes), saying that all was in order, and coming to occupy the presidential cha
ir, help him favorably resolve the current conflict in the case.
Vicente Fox mentions that, with even President of Mexico, informed him that "fiv
e young men" did not like the person, which mentioned that "he loved them," howe
ver, the president, he insisted that dialogue with them ( but Maximiliano Cortaz
ar, who was one of them had already transcribed the lines reported above) were t
hen, those same young people, who had been recommended to Calderon, do not go th
e last day of his campaign to Monitor (the program Gutierrez Vivo ), so, mention
that he had "left alone."
Concerns that the award by $ 21 million, includes a clause for each year that is
not paid the same, be increased by six percent to the amount cited above as a s
anction, which for the year of 2010 fixed the new amount over $ 30 million to pa
y for part of Grupo Radio Centro.
The entrepreneur and journalist, said that final decision of the First Chamber o
f the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, becomes the third analysis of the
case has made the above and in his own words, in law or anything nobody can be t
ried two or three times for the same offense.
Also one of the lawyers named Infored Quijano Baz, commented on CNN after losing
the award, the Aguirre family, was already litigated in national territory agai
nst the award, which goes against, international treaties, such as Free Commerce
; signed with the United States and Canada, as the matter was settled and done,
proceeding to payment to that family.
Emphasize the fact that the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, would have d
ealt with the case, as usually, it only deals with national issues and not dispu
tes between companies, but the ministers saw the If I had to do with freedom of
expression, the disappearance of half a Mexico "that will democratize" and using
"tricks to do what they finally did."
Gutierrez Vivo, sued the 63 court for various offenses, which mentioned that an
investigation is, however, when quoted, it has never done anything as in his own
words is "protected and as I said, we judge among judges ". The Supreme Court's
unanimous decision must be delivered to the judge to comply with the rules of a
rbitration adopted by the Senate, in the era of President Carlos Salinas de Gort
ari.
The Aguirre family will receive the payment order to Infor, which if not met, pr
oceed to the seizure of the company, which the dismissal of employees left unemp
loyed Infored over two hundred thousand people, which left them to collect all p
ayments and benefits from your employer, Grupo Radio Centro. (Live, 2010)
IV. Conclusion
This leaves a very bad position in the Mexican Republic to the international leg
al environment as it reveals that our country has the legal means to reject arbi
tration awards, which in turn are recognized by the amendments to the articles i
n governing commercial matters in the territory.
Recall that arbitration rather than litigation, is a gentleman's agreement to se
ttle their differences, scholars based on the matters on which turns the conflic
t and, therefore, must be recognized by the judges immediately, without interven
e in the process that led to the final decision or award.
That is why special attention should be paid to cases like against Infored Grupo
Radio Centro, to avoid being committed again and again weave legal complication
s, which under other interests, forget the ultimate purpose of the law, which is
protecting the most disadvantaged classes to abuse by those who hold control of
the country.
Moreover, it is important to note the particular Amparo since in most jurisdicti
ons there is something similar. That is, consider it necessary to adopt regulati
ons to give more independence to arbitration by the public courts but also give
stronger binding, as it does not seem right that a victory in an arbitration pro
ceeding by legal tricks can be rescinded and that is violating the very principl
e of arbitration is by the free will of the parties and is supposed to undertake
to abide by the provisions of the court. It could be interpreted even more in b
ad faith, any person or legal entity that you want to breach a contract, bad fai
th says that it intends to submit to arbitration and is submitted to an arbitrat
ion agreement subsequently breach the contract and when enforce the award and wo
n the under under under review (bi-instancial) against the implementation proces
s and leave them defenseless to the counterparty because the principles of exclu
sion and res-judicata forums (res-judicata) is not possible to return to conduct
another trial or arbitration to resolve the same dispute.
Fortunately the case Infored had a good end to the Supreme Court's ordering the
payment, but I think it should not be necessary after such complex legal award a
nd especially to determine whether long run or if it will void.
For that, I think in Mexico we need a lot of attitude and culture pro-arbitratio
n, not only to benefit but also to international arbitration to resolve disputes
in our own country to Mexican individuals or entities involved. This pro-arbitr
ation culture must be reflected in new regulation and laws by which in my view,
in Mexico and are the current systems and any potential delay in the trial that
there is not attractive to carry out such arbitration procedures, which can affe
ct even economics because there are no guarantees for foreign companies who want
to come to invest in Mexico if they prefer arbitration proceedings to resolve t
heir conflicts.
Bibliography
Araizaga, JC (2007). Supports the court review the case INFORED - RADIO CENTRO.
Process.
Aranda, J. (Wednesday, January, 2007). INFORED round wins proceedings before the
Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation Radio Centro. Retrieved on November 3, 2
010, La Jornada: http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2007/01/31/index.php?section=politic
a&article=003n1pol
Chapa, MA (July 14, 2006). Infored still / Public Square. Retrieved October 23,
2010, El Siglo de Torreón: http://www.elsiglodetorreon.com.mx/noticia/225051.html
Diego Gómez Cáceres, GC (2004). The arbitral award. In contracts in international ma
rketing (p. 236). Madrid: ESIC Editorial.
El Universal. (September 8, 2010). Radio Centro loses injunction against Infored
. Retrieved November 2, 2010, in josegutierrezVivó.blogspot.com: http://josegutier
rezVivó.blogspot.com/2010/09/radio-centro-pierde-amparo-contra.html
Fuentes, V. (2008). Gutierrez Vivo wins court case to Radio Centro. Reform.
Fundación Manuel Buendía (Mexico). (2005). Journal of Communication No. 91 - 99, pg.
2.
Jesus, JG (2002). Introduction to the Mexican Amparo. Mexico: Editorial Limusa.
Lamadrid, LM (2002). The influence of international law in Mexican law: the open
ing of Mexico's development model. Editorial Limusa.
Méndez, A. (December 6, 2008). A judge ultimately upheld the protection obtained i
n 2005 by the company of Jose Gutierrez Vivo against Radio Centro. Retrieved Oct
ober 10, 2010, the Kikka-rioja.blogspot.com: http://kikka-roja.blogspot.com/2008
_06_08_archive.html
Mexico. (1999). Oficial Journal Volume 550, pg. 120.
Rueda, CF (2008). Waiver of right to object: The case INFORED. Corporate Counsel
, 44-50.
Ruiz, CL (2000). Enforcement of foreign commercial arbitral awards in Mexico. Me
xico: Fontanamara.
Silva, JA (2001). International Commercial Arbitration in Mexico. Mexico: Editor
ial Oxford.
University of California. (2004). Volume expansion 885-887, pg. 75.
Vivo, JG (September 10, 2010). MVS News. (C. Aristegui, Interviewer)