Court Restores Possession of Tulum Beach Club Property to Claimants

Tulum, Quintana Roo — Authorities on Tuesday, Aug. 11, executed a court order restoring possession of a beachfront property in Tulum’s hotel zone that once housed the Naay Tulum Beach club.

The restitution was carried out by judicial officials from the Playa del Carmen civil court, which had ordered the property handed back to the plaintiffs in a long-running legal dispute. The case, listed as file 324/2016, stems from an amparo petition filed by Ernesto García Amador and José Fernando Jiménez Soto.

The property, identified as definitive parcel 1981 within the José María Pino Suárez agrarian community, is located on the Tulum-Boca Paila highway at about kilometer 8.5. It ceased operations months ago; before Naay Tulum Beach, the site was home to the Vagalume beach club, which later relocated.

The dispute has spanned several years and multiple federal rulings. In September 2021, a court granted a definitive suspension of the contested order, restoring possession to the amparo petitioners. A formal handover followed in November of that year.

The case shifted on May 30, 2023, when a federal authority ruled on a request by Mauricio Esteban, Ciro Miguel, José Rafael and Francesco Saveria Schiavon Magaña to modify the suspension. That decision changed the terms of the injunction that had previously favored García Amador and Jiménez Soto.

Later requests for suspension were rejected, and the court concluded that the legal conditions existed to proceed with the execution of the original ruling and continue the restitution process in the civil case.

In the latest order, Judge Víctor Alfonso Escalante Hernández authorized judicial officers N.A.F.N. and M.E.A.R. to carry out the physical handover of the property. The order permitted the use of public force and the opening of locks if necessary.

Officers from Tulum’s Public Security and Citizen Protection Department were called to support the operation, but the handover was completed without incident.

The action represents the latest development in a legal battle that has lasted nearly a decade, shaped by amparo appeals, suspensions, modifications and other challenges over control of the property.