Supreme Court dismisses Avícola Las Margaritas cassation in damages suit against Lisa, S.A.
Apr 5 2024
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of Justice, Civil Chamber, dismissed the cassation appeal filed by Avícola Las Margaritas, S.A. against the May 17, 2023 ruling of the First Chamber of the Civil and Commercial Court of Appeals, which had upheld the dismissal of the ordinary damages lawsuit against Lisa, S.A. The appellant invoked error of fact in the appreciation of evidence by omission with respect to two documents. The Chamber concluded that, although the appellate court did omit analysis of both documents, the omission did not affect the outcome because neither document was sufficient to prove the claimed damages.
Avícola Las Margaritas, S.A. (through its representative Francisco Chávez Bosque) filed an ordinary lawsuit for damages and moral damages against Lisa, S.A., alleging that a series of unfounded lawsuits, fabrication of evidence, and smear campaigns carried out by Lisa or entities linked to it caused financial and moral harm. Lisa answered in the negative, filed peremptory exceptions, and counterclaimed for damages, arguing that Las Margaritas' lawsuit was itself abusive.
The first-instance ruling of May 31, 2022 dismissed Las Margaritas' claim, finding the peremptory exception of inadmissibility of damages well-founded due to a lack of evidence establishing the existence and certainty of the alleged damages. It also dismissed Lisa's counterclaim for lack of standing to claim indemnification, given insufficient proof. The appellate ruling of May 17, 2023 affirmed the judgment, rejecting Las Margaritas' grievances and concluding that the evidence did not establish the harm suffered as required by Article 1648 of the Civil Code.
The appellant invoked a single ground: error of fact in the appreciation of evidence by omission, under Article 621(2) of the Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure. It alleged that the appellate court omitted analysis of two documents that were determinative:
Regarding the first document, the appellant argued that its analysis would have allowed the court to verify the amount by which its patrimony was diminished. Regarding the second, it argued that the Canadian proceeding demonstrated the existence of a corporate structure of which Lisa forms part, payments to Guatemalan lawyers who directed lawsuits on Lisa's behalf, and the financing of a media and political smear campaign against the Avícola Group companies.
The Chamber set forth the applicable standard: error of fact in the appreciation of evidence by omission arises when the appellate court fails to appreciate a piece of evidence and that omission is of sufficient magnitude to alter the outcome of the ruling.
On the accounting certification. The Chamber verified that the appellate court did omit any pronouncement on this document. However, upon examining its content, the Chamber found that the certification merely records the existence of expenses and provisions arising from Lisa, S.A.'s actions totaling Q4,467,032.32, without establishing that Lisa caused the damages. The Chamber noted that the document records accounting entries but does not establish a causal link between the defendant's conduct and the alleged financial harm. Therefore, its omission does not affect the outcome.
On the Ontario proceeding. The Chamber likewise verified the omission but concluded that the document only proves the existence of a pending commercial proceeding abroad (the protocolization of a record from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice). The appellant's argument that this document demonstrated Lisa's corporate structure and payments to lawyers and media outlets was not accepted, as the Chamber found the document's content insufficient to prove the damages alleged.
The Chamber concluded that both documents, despite having been omitted, are not useful for resolving the controversy (whether Lisa caused damages to Las Margaritas), and therefore the cassation ground was inadmissible.