On 8 May 2024, Administrative Court No. 2 of Tarragona issues its judgment on the legal challenge against the economic reparcelación project for PAU-4 in Planas del Rey.
The legal action was brought by the Asociación de Vecinos de Les Planes del Rei and several property owners against the decision adopted by the Municipality of Pratdip on 1 July 2022.
The Court declares the legal challenge inadmissible. It therefore does not rule on the substance of the disagreement between the Municipality and the property owners.
In other words, the judgment does not state that the municipal project is justified or that the property owners are wrong. It considers that the disputed issues were already included in earlier decisions that had become final and could not be challenged again through this new procedure.
The municipal decision of 1 July 2022
In September 2021, the Municipality of Pratdip initially approves a new version of the economic reparcelación project for PAU-4. The document is subsequently submitted to public consultation, during which numerous property owners file objections.
This mobilisation and the main arguments raised at the time are explained in our article about the opposition of SOS Planas and several property owners to the new reparcelación project.
Those contesting the project argue, among other points, that certain plots of land and facilities had already been transferred to the Municipality and that some of the infrastructure works had been completed many years earlier. They therefore consider that the Municipality should bear the costs relating to these assets and infrastructures.
The municipal document dated 1 July 2022 responds to these objections.
The Municipality partially accepts some of them, notably to correct information concerning certain properties and to remove references to the former EUCC from the project. However, it rejects the main objections concerning the need for the reparcelación and the allocation of future costs.
The Local Government Board then decides to grant final approval to the PAU-4 reparcelación project.
The project is challenged before the Court
Following this approval, the Asociación de Vecinos de Les Planes del Rei and several property owners bring the matter before Administrative Court No. 2 of Tarragona.
The action, registered as ordinary procedure 367/2022, seeks the annulment of the municipal decision.
The claimants argue that the reparcelación is not justified because the transfers of land intended for the Municipality had already taken place and the urbanisation’s works and services already existed. They therefore consider that the Municipality should bear the costs relating to the assets that had already been transferred to it.
The Municipality, for its part, asks the Court to declare the action inadmissible. It argues that the project approved in 2022 essentially reproduces earlier projects that had already become final.
Why is the legal challenge declared inadmissible?
The Court finds that the decision of 1 July 2022 is legally distinct from the earlier municipal decisions. It therefore does not declare the action inadmissible simply because the same issues had previously been the subject of legal proceedings.
However, the Court notes that the 2022 project essentially reproduces the earlier projects. The main changes concern the description and boundaries of certain properties, together with the addition of their geographical coordinates.
The arguments presented by the property owners do not concern these changes, but relate instead to matters already included in the earlier projects.
The Court therefore applies Article 28 of the Spanish Law governing the Administrative Courts. This provision prevents a legal challenge against an act that merely reproduces or confirms an earlier decision that has already become final.
According to the Court, on the disputed points, the 2022 municipal decision reproduces earlier decisions that could no longer be challenged through this procedure.
It therefore declares the legal challenge inadmissible.
The substance of the disagreement is not examined
This distinction is essential to understanding the scope of the judgment.
In its Judgment No. 146/2024 of 8 May 2024, the Court does not decide whether the property owners’ arguments are correct or incorrect.
In particular, it does not determine:
- whether all the infrastructure in Planas del Rey had been properly completed;
- whether the entire urbanisation had been formally accepted by the Municipality;
- whether all the planned transfers of land had already taken place;
- what proportion of the future works should be financed by the Municipality;
- what proportion could be charged to the property owners;
- whether all the financial assessments contained in the project were accurate.
The Court considers only that these matters cannot be examined again as part of this legal challenge.
The Court’s decision
The legal challenge brought by the Asociación de Vecinos de Les Planes del Rei and the other property owners is therefore declared inadmissible.
The claimants are also ordered to pay the legal costs, capped at €500, including VAT.
The judgment states that an appeal could be lodged within fifteen days of its notification. The documents available to us do not establish whether this possibility was subsequently used.
What we should remember
The judgment of 8 May 2024 does not uphold the Municipality’s position on the substance of the dispute. Nor does it reject the property owners’ arguments after examining their merits.
It finds that, in relation to the disputed issues, the project approved in 2022 reproduces earlier decisions that had already become final. For this procedural reason, the Court declines to examine these matters again.
The conclusion can therefore be summarised simply: the legal challenge is unsuccessful, but this judgment does not resolve the substance of the disagreement concerning the infrastructure, the transfers of land and the allocation of costs.
Jim – La Tribune de Planas
Documents
The two documents make it possible to follow the procedure:
Exact addresses, filing references, plot numbers and bank details that were not necessary for understanding the procedure have been removed from the published versions.
