Short answer. Yes, potentially. Article 285 lets an employee resign without just cause by serving written notice at least one month in advance. If no such notice is served, the employer may hold the employee liable for damages — unless the resignation falls under one of the just causes the article lists as excusing notice entirely.
What the law says
Termination by employee. An employee may terminate without just cause the employee-employer relationship by serving a written notice on the employer at least one (1) month in advance. The employer upon whom no such notice was served may hold the employee liable for damages. An employee may put an end to the relationship without serving any notice on the employer for any of the following just causes: Serious insult by the employer or his representative on the honor and person of the employee; Inhuman and unbearable treatment accorded the employee by the employer or his representative; Commission of a crime or offense by the employer or his representative against the person of the employee or any of the immediate members of his family; and Other causes analogous to any of the foregoing.
Labor Code, Article 285 — Resignation By The Employee. Read the full provision →
The general rule: one month's notice, or possible liability
Article 285 allows an employee to terminate the employment relationship without just cause simply by serving a written notice on the employer at least one month in advance. The article then states directly that the employer upon whom no such notice was served may hold the employee liable for damages. This is the textual basis for the common '30-day notice' expectation: it is not that resignation without notice is prohibited outright, but that skipping it exposes the resigning employee to a possible damages claim.
The just causes that let you skip notice entirely
The article also lists situations where an employee may end the relationship without serving any notice at all, because notice is not required for these just causes: serious insult by the employer or representative on the employee's honor and person; inhuman and unbearable treatment by the employer or representative; commission of a crime or offense by the employer or representative against the employee or an immediate family member; and other analogous causes. Where one of these applies, the one-month notice requirement, and the damages exposure tied to skipping it, do not come into play the same way.
"May hold liable" is not the same as an automatic judgment
The text says the employer may hold the employee liable for damages, not that damages are automatically owed the moment notice is skipped. The employer would still need to actually pursue and establish a damages claim; the article creates the legal basis for that claim to exist, but the amount and whether it succeeds are not fixed by this article's text.
What the article does not tell you
Article 285 does not state how damages are computed, what proof an employer must present, or where such a claim is brought. Those procedural and evidentiary questions sit outside the text reproduced here. What is clear from the article is the basic structure: notice is the employee's general obligation when resigning without just cause, the just-cause list is the exception that removes that obligation, and skipping required notice opens the door to, without guaranteeing, a damages claim against you.