The Second Chamber of Mexico’s Supreme Court of Justice (Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación or SCJN) recently held incase decisions 2a./J. 28/2011, under the heading “Noncompliance As set forth in the Procurement, Leasing and Public ServicesSector Law. Against its resolution in direct amparo lawsuits may proceed.” In such decision, the Second Chamber determinedthat in opposition to a resolution that decides an award challenge an indirect amparo lawsuit can be filed being unnecessary toexercise all the ordinary remedies available under the Procurement, Leasing and Public Services Sector Law, such as the reviewremedy (recurso de revision) or the administrative procedure (juicio contencioso administrativo.) The Supreme Court of Justicedetermined that the term “may” allows to consider that the remedy is an option as to the administrative procedure, therefore, theprinciple regarding the exercise o all remedies before filing an amparo lawsuit only applies as to the administrative procedure.There is an exception to such principle, given that the Federal Administrative Procedure Law (Ley Federal del Procedimiento Contencioso Administrativo) provides more requirements to grant an injunction than those established in the Amparo Law, asresolved in prior decision 2a./J.56/2007. The decision recently approved is still pending to be published in the Federation’sJudicial Weekly publication.