We are pleased to share our latest Spanish timeshare court victories from the past few weeks. M1 Legal secured TWENTY TWO positive awards with a total value of £447,895 (an average of £20,358 per case). The highest award in these results was confirmed against Silverpoint, valued at £49,312.
Below is a breakdown of the substantive outcomes:
1st Court of Instance:
- Silverpoint - At Arona Court No. 1, the judge declared the timeshare contract null due to missing property information and missing contract term details, under Law 42/1998. Amount awarded - £49,312.
- Explotación Hotelera - Also in Arona, the judge declared the contract null due to missing contract term information, under Law 04/2012. Amount awarded - £23,800.
- Marriott x 5 - At Marbella Court No. 4, the judge declared all five contracts null due to missing property information (Laws 42/1998 and 04/2012). Amounts awarded - £17,138, £8,846, £29,441, £33,482, £35,796.
- Regency Limited (Taboo Inversiones) - Tabobo Inversiones is again considered illegitimate, and the lawsuit is only against Regency Limited due to "legal doubts" (although they do recognise it). Despite it being proven that Tabobo is responsible for maintenance and executes the contract, they do not consider their legitimacy (Article 1.5 Law 42/1998), which is outrageous. Adrian (the M1 Legal lawyer representing the case) will appeal and include Marabú S.L., which owns the apartments. Adrian will also request a declaration of Regency Limited's assets in other enforcement proceedings, which is concerning them. We will see in due course what transpires. The contract was declared null (Law 42/1998) due to missing contract term information. Amount awarded - £40,254.
- CLC Paradise Trading x 3 - At Arona Courts Nos. 1 and 4, the judge declared one contract null due to missing contract term information; the other two cases were due to missing property details and missing contract term information. Amounts awarded - £9,853, £13,904, £14,386.
Appeals:
- Diamond Resorts - The Provincial Court in Tenerife overturned the First Instance decision and declared the contract null and void due to missing property information (Law 04/2012), with an express order for costs. Amount awarded - £14,363.
- Diamond Resorts - The Court of Appeal in Malaga upheld in full the First Instance judgment declaring the contract null due to missing property information (Laws 42/1998 and 04/2012). Amount awarded - £32,670.
- Explotación Hotelera - The Court of Appeal in Malaga upheld in full the First Instance judgment declaring the contract null due to missing property information (Law 42/1998). Amount awarded - £23,800.
- Anfi - The Court of Appeal in Las Palmas upheld in full the First Instance judgment declaring the contract null due to missing property information (Law 42/1998). Amount awarded - £12,860.
- Fuerteventura - The Court of Appeal in Tenerife upheld in full the First Instance judgment declaring the contract null due to missing property information (Law 04/2012). Amount awarded - £11,160.
- CLC Sucursal x 3 - At the Court of Appeal in Malaga, the judgments from the First Instance were upheld in full, declaring all four contracts null and void due to missing property information (Law 04/2012). Amounts awarded - £10,146, £13,661, £20,077.
- CLC Continental Resorts - The Court of Appeal in Tenerife upheld in full the First Instance judgment declaring the contract null due to missing property information and missing contract term information (Law 04/2012). Amount awarded - £17,794.
We also received a positive decision against Anfi where the case was decided in our favour at both First Instance and in the Court of Appeal, declaring the contract null due to missing property information (Law 42/1998). Anfi took this particular case to the Supreme Court in Spain, which has now also ruled in our favour, confirming the previous judgments.
Jurisdiction:
Six cases valued at £82,960
Our positive jurisdiction results were:
- Three cases against CLC World
- Two cases against Diamond Resorts
- One case against Marriott
In one of the CLC World cases (CLC UK PLC), they requested that the lawsuit be discontinued pending a preliminary ruling on jurisdiction before the European Court. The Court of Appeal declined this request, confirming the claim should continue under Spanish law.
In the Marriott case, the judge rejected the jurisdiction challenge raised by Marriott, based on EU Regulation 1215/2012 and Spanish Law LOPJ Art. 22, and declared the Spanish courts competent to process the claim.
In one of the Diamond Resorts cases, the judge rejected the defendant’s jurisdiction argument and confirmed the Spanish courts are competent to process the claim. In the other Diamond Resorts case, the judge declared that Diamond Resorts Europe (the company that absorbed Sunterra) is liable to be claimed under Spanish jurisdiction.
In two of the CLC World cases (Continental and Paradise Trading), an appeal for reversal was rejected by the judge, bringing the jurisdiction issue to an end.
All cases mentioned above will now proceed to the next step.
A great achievement for everyone involved in these cases.
