Recent Jurisprudence – Burden of Proof in Claims of Days of Weekly Rest and Compulsory Rest, by Adrian Salgado

The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Nation recently published decision number 2a./J. 63/2017 (10a), entitled: “Days of weekly rest and compulsory rest. Burden of proof in regards to claims for such items.” This decision resolves the contradiction between the prior decisions of the Circuit Collegiate Tribunals, the Third of the Auxiliary Center of the Tenth Region, and the First of the Auxiliary Center of the Fourth Region, the latter being the subject of an article in the June 2014 CCN MexicoReport™. In the present case, the Second Chamber concluded that two procedural burdens are generated in accordance with the general principle that whoever makes a claim is obligated to provide the proof. As such, the first burden consists of the employee’s obligation to prove that he or she actually worked such days, and the second burden is the employer's obligation to demonstrate that it actually paid such days once the first burden has been met by the employee, without prejudice to the capacity of the Board to exempt the employee from having to meet the burden of proof under the terms of Article 784 of the Federal Labor Law.