All EOS blogs All Spain blogs  Start your own blog Start your own blog 

El blog de Maria

Your daily Spanish Law reporter. Have it with a cafe con leche.

Legal tip 1171. NEW! Won case against Inroal and Banco Mare Nostrum
24 June 2014 @ 10:56


The final paragraphs of the First Instance Sentence delivered on 5 June 2014 and notified on 17 June 2014 state: 

BANCO MARE NOSTRUM S.A. is sentenced to refund the amount of 19,469.94€ plus legal interest at 6% per annum on that amount from 3 August 2011 until the date of payment.

 With regards to the liability of the Bank according to its obligations under LEY 57/1968 the Judge stated:
 “The liability of the bank is not dependent on the bank account being titled or of the type ‘Special’, but what is important is the ‘essence’ of the account.  Thus to understand in this case we are in the presence of a special account, the buyer must have paid to an account in the name Promociones Inroal S.L. opened in Caja General de Ahorros de Granada and the Bank must have known that the amounts being paid to that account were from off-plan buyers in relation to the construction of housing.
It is a proven fact that Promociones Inroal S.L. had only a single account with Caja Granada and it is a proven fact that Mr xxxxxxxx paid 19,469.94€ into the account to pay for an off-plan apartment.  Thus it can be assumed that the bank knew that the account was for income derived from the purchase of off-plan homes.
It is proven that the money was credited to an account opened by Promociones Inroal S.L. in the bank known today as Banco Mare Nostrum and that account is a special account according to the meaning of Article 1 of LEY 57/1968.  It must be concluded that the bank is responsible under the Article 1segundo of LEY 57/1968 for failing to demand from the Promotor the corresponding Certificate of Insurance or Guarantee.
Thus the bank is liable to the buyer for failing to fulfil its obligations according to LEY 57/1968 for amounts paid to the bank for the purchase of off-plan property”.
Good for Granada Judge! Congrats to client and Costaluz&DeCastro teams!!
Costa Luz Left
Granada 5, Granada, South eastern Spain, by Fernando Lopez, at

Like 1


belucky358 said:
24 June 2014 @ 10:54


This is excellent news, well done.

I see the judge is saying that he "assumes" that the bank knew that the account was for income derived from the purchase of off plan homes. Would it assist my case if I can produce a copy of a paying document to the Bank which has the words "HOUSE PURCHASE" written thereon.

Is the 6% a standard rate of interest for the refund of deposits from Banks.

Is it calculated as "simple" interest, or "compound" interest.

I see on my Purchase Contract that the Developer is also obliged to pay 6% interest, if the Contract is not fulfilled.

mariadecastro said:
24 June 2014 @ 11:00


Every case is different, so I will have to see the whole story before stating to you the value that the transfer you are mentioning has as evidence.

6% was before reform of 1999, now, the interest rate is legal interest ( which has been around 4% these years). If the contract agreed 6% as penalty for breach of contract, this is, in many cases, respected by the Judge as its more favourable for the consumer.

belucky358 said:
24 June 2014 @ 11:08


Regarding the interest, is it calculated as "simple" interest or "compound" interest, as this makes a vast difference in the outcome.

mariadecastro said:
24 June 2014 @ 11:42

Interest is simple

dotty199 said:
29 June 2014 @ 21:04

The problem with the Spanish system is that the builder invariably appeals because they know that they can string the case out. The injustice to buyers will not end until the Spanish judges throw out those appeals which have no merit. It's time the court system wakes up and stops the delays.

Only registered users can comment on this blog post. Please Sign In or Register now.


This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More information here. x