Overview
- The Court held that the right to receive child support is imprescriptible and irrenunciable, expressly extending this protection to retroactive amounts owed.
- Justices ruled that repeatedly paying below a court‑ordered pension without authorization or a justified cause can constitute a criminal offense, validating the use of penal law when civil tools fall short.
- In a Guanajuato case, the Court revoked an amparo and confirmed that legal recognition by a relative, such as a maternal grandfather, does not relieve the biological parent of support duties, including past due sums even after the child reaches adulthood.
- Judges must weigh factors to fix retroactive payments—such as the parent’s knowledge of the pregnancy or birth and good or bad faith—and the debtor bears the burden to prove inability to pay.
- The revised criteria apply nationwide and the reviewed cases return to lower tribunals for new rulings, reinforcing enforcement measures that may include wage garnishment, asset embargoes and, in serious cases, imprisonment.