The Courts have decided to annul the fine that the Government of the Canary Islands imposed on an entity from Lanzarote for the rental of a property for tourist purposes. The ruling of the Contentious-Administrative Court number 3 of Las Palmas annuls the resolution that imposed a fine of 5,258 euros on this company and, in addition, orders the Administration to pay the "procedural costs" of this lawsuit.
It was the lawyer of the Canary Islands Vacation Rental Association, of which this entity is an associate, who was in charge of representing this company from Lanzarote. In the appeal he filed against the resolution of the General Technical Secretariat of the Presidency of the Government of the Canary Islands, the lawyer of this company, Javier Valentín Peñate, requested the "nullity" of that resolution. To do this, he appealed to the principle of "typicality", which requires that the type of crime that is applied strictly conforms to the facts committed, and requested the "application of the most favorable regulations", while denying the "commission of any infraction".
The Canarian Government based its decision to fine this entity on the lack of prior authorization to carry out a rental for tourist purposes. In its response to the claim, it requested that the appeal of this entity be dismissed, considering that the resolution complied with the law. However, this ruling, against which no appeal is possible, has now decided to annul that decision.
The ruling, emphasizing the rules regarding the "retroactivity of criminal laws favorable to the defendant", points out that the fine was imposed for "violation" of a law that had already been reformed. The ruling explains that, with this, it had ceased to "be constitutive of an administrative infraction" the "exercise of tourist activity without the mandatory authorizations for the entry into service of establishments and performance of regulated tourist activities". And it adds that, "in particular", it ceased to be an infraction the "opening of the establishment without prior tourist authorization".
In this sense, the ruling of the Contentious-Administrative Court cites four judgments of the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands on which it is based, pointing out that, "among many others", they record that these facts are not considered infractions. It also adds that this occurs "without prejudice to compliance with the requirements of communication and responsible declaration". For Ascav, which emphasizes that "the fight continues" in the Courts, this is a "devastating" ruling that "accepts the theses" defended by its lawyer.
