A court ruling has ordered the review of the forced sale of the palacete located at Taxdirt 28 street in Jerez. The decision, issued on June 30, upholds the appeal filed by the company Grana Padana S.L. and invalidates the appraisal that served as the basis for the property's adjudication for 590,000 euros, compelling the City Council to carry out a new legally compliant valuation.
The procedure, initiated by the local government as part of its urban regeneration strategy for the historic center, involved the tender for the forced sale of the property with a starting price of 260,207.19 euros and capacity for 65 homes. Subsequently, the property was awarded to Promotora Social San Fernando S.L.U. for 590,000 euros, with a commitment to build 50 homes. The appraisal now annulled was the cornerstone of this entire process.
The property spans 2,005 square meters with a built area of 839 square meters, consisting of an isolated mansion in the Jerezano palacete style, built in the 1950s, along with three auxiliary buildings. The old palacete has been abandoned for years and has been the subject of numerous neighborhood complaints due to pest infestations, unsanitary conditions, and continuous squatting and vandalism.
The ruling clarifies that it does not question the municipal decision to subject the building to forced sale for failure to meet conservation duties, but rather the method used to calculate its economic value. The judge considers that temporal references and motivational criteria not in line with current regulations were employed.
The conflict arose after the property was declared non-compliant with its conservation obligations and included in the Municipal Registry of Ruinous Plots and Buildings. In October 2024, the City Council approved a valuation of 260,207.19 euros, subsequently dismissing the property owner's claims and the appeal for reconsideration, which ultimately led the company to take legal action.
Grana Padana argued errors in the valuation parameters and a lack of sufficient motivation, although the claim of legal fraud was ultimately dismissed. The key point of the litigation was determining when the administrative procedure was initiated, with the City Council advocating for technical reports from September 2024, while the company maintained the procedure began with the formal initiation agreement on October 21.
The magistrate sided with the appellant, recalling that an ex officio procedure commences with the formal initiation agreement. This is crucial because the valuation should have been based on real estate market data from the fourth quarter of 2024. However, the City Council used data from earlier periods, arguing that published data for those dates was not yet available. The ruling finds this decision violated regulations, as the Administration could not substitute the legal criterion with one based on analogical application.
The ruling also questions the motivation of the municipal technical report, deeming it insufficient that general expenses and industrial profit were justified solely by stating the applied percentage was "commonly known," as this explanation does not reveal the technical criteria used nor allows interested parties to contest the valuation.
Furthermore, the judge rejects the notion that reports prepared by municipal technicians enjoy an absolute presumption of correctness simply because they come from specialized civil servants, reminding that they can be judicially reviewed when objective reasons exist. Consequently, the ruling declares the valuation report and all directly dependent actions null and void, ordering the expediente to be rolled back for the City Council to conduct a new appraisal in accordance with the law. Other actions unaffected by these defects remain valid. The resolution, which can be appealed, does not prevent the Council from continuing with the forced sale, but it does require redoing an essential step, as the annulled valuation set the bidding price and finalized the adjudication approved in May 2025.
