The resolution, which is not yet final, partially annuls the agreement approved by the City Council Plenary on May 28, 2024. Specifically, it concerns the suspension of change of use licenses and the effectiveness of responsible declarations. The rest of the moratorium, however, remains in force.
The court bases this decision on the fact that, at the time the measure was approved, article 68.1 of the Law on Territorial Planning, Urbanism and Landscape (LOTUP) only allowed the suspension of licenses for parceling, building, and demolition. It did not expressly include changes of use or responsible declarations. The TSJCV emphasizes that license suspension measures directly affect individual rights and, therefore, cannot be interpreted extensively.
Just two months after the municipal moratorium was approved, the Generalitat modified that same article of the TRLOTUP to expressly include changes of use and responsible declarations. However, the ruling clarifies that this reform cannot be applied retroactively or validate an agreement that, at the time of its approval, lacked legal coverage.
To understand the technical scope of this resolution, it is essential to distinguish between the administrative figures at play. The building license, whose paralysis in the moratorium the court has validated as proportional to protect the general interest, refers to new construction works. The change of use license is the permit that authorizes legally modifying the purpose of a property, such as transforming a commercial premises or office into a tourist dwelling. On the other hand, the responsible declaration is a document where the owner assures compliance with all current regulations, allowing them to start the activity or reform immediately without waiting for a prior response from the City Council.
Given this scenario, the City Council has already announced that it is studying appealing the ruling, for which it has a period of 30 days. The mayor herself, María José Catalá, defends that it is an interpretative discrepancy and maintains that the urban planning regulations approved later practically limit the scope of the ruling.
If the Supreme Court rejects the municipal appeal and the ruling becomes final, those developers who appealed the paralysis of their applications at the time may demand that their licenses be processed according to the regulations in force at the time they were submitted. This would imply that the regulations subsequently approved by the City Council, known as the “five locks” regulations, would not apply to them. In addition, the ruling also opens the door to possible claims for patrimonial liability arising from the paralysis of these files.
For now, however, the real scope of this possible effect is unknown. According to municipal data, the moratorium has paralyzed a total of 363 files, which include both building licenses and change of use and responsible declarations. However, it will be necessary to determine how many of these cases correspond to the part of the moratorium now annulled and, furthermore, how many were appealed at the time, since only the latter could benefit from the effects of the ruling.
“"Many of those affected are already considering requesting compensation for patrimonial liability after having had their licenses paralyzed for more than two years. These amounts could skyrocket if the City Council decides to go to the Supreme Court, which would lengthen resolution times and increase lost profits."
From the employers' association APTUR —which also has an appeal pending resolution against the moratorium— they have already begun to make estimates on the cost of these possible claims. The association estimates the economic impact for the City Council at around five million euros.
