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. www.costaluzlawyers.es

Legal tip 1392.WON CASE in PROVINCIAL APPEAL COURT AGAINST BANCO MARE NOSTRUM (previously CAJA GRANADA) FOR CLIEN at PROMOCIONES INROAL S.L. AT THE ANDARAX DEVELOPMENT IN TERQUE
18 July 2016 @ 12:35

WON CASE in PROVINCIAL APPEAL COURT AGAINST BANCO MARE NOSTRUM (previously CAJA GRANADA) FOR OUR CLIENT WHO PURCHASED AN OFF-PLAN PROPERTY FROM THE DEVELOPER PROMOCIONES INROAL S.L. AT THE ANDRAX DEVELOPMENT IN TERQUE

We were extremely pleased to inform our client recently that we had won their case against BANCO MARE NOSTRUM in the Provincial Appeal Court.

The client paid their off-plan deposit to the developer’s account at CAJA GRANADA (now BANCO MARE NOSTRUM).  The client did not receive an individual Guarantee for their off-plan deposit from the developer, Promociones Inroal S.L. or from CAJA GRANADA, the Bank to which their off-plan deposit was paid and the Bank that signed a Guarantee Line with the developer.

In June 2014 the case was won in the First Instance Court. BANCO MARE NOSTRUM filed an appeal against the First Instance Sentence.

The Provincial Appeal Court has dismissed the Bank’s Appeal and confirmed the First Instance Sentence in full.

Re: YOUR CASE AGAINST PROMOCIONES INROAL S.L. & CAJA GENERAL DE AHORROS DE GRANADA (BANCO MARE NOSTRUM S.A.)
PO xxx/2012

Please find attached Sentence number xxx/2016 from the Provincial Appeal Court of Granada.

I am very pleased to advise you that the Appeal filed by Banco Mare Nostrum has been dismissed and the First Instance Sentence has been fully confirmed.

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



“Agree to archive the procedure in respect of PROMOCIONES INROAL S.L. absolving the entity of all the motions that were made against it, having been renounced by the plaintiff, without the imposition of costs.

Estimating partially the Lawsuit filed on behalf of xxxxx against BANCO MARE NOSTRUM S.A. and condemn this defendant to pay to the plaintiff the amount of xx,xxx Euro plus legal interest at 6% per annum on that amount from 3 August 2011 until full payment.  Each party shall pay its own legal costs of this procedure and the common costs will be halved.”


The final paragraph of the Provincial Appeal Court Sentence delivered on 27 May 2016 and notified on 30 May 2016 states:


“Dismissing the Appeal filed against the Sentence dated 5 June 2014 issued by the Judge of the First Instance Court No. 5 of Roquetas de Mar, we must confirm that Sentence and impose the costs of this appeal on the appellant bank”


So the Appeal filed by Banco Mare Nostrum has been dismissed and the First Instance Sentence has been fully confirmed.

Costs of the Appeal are imposed on Banco Mare Nostrum.

As per the First Instance Sentence BANCO MARE NOSTRUM S.A. is condemned to refund the amount of xx,xxx€ plus legal interest at 6% per annum on that amount from 3 August 2011 until the date of payment.

Each party will pay its own costs relating to the First Instance Proceedings and common costs will be halved.

The Appeal Court Magistrates stated:


“In short, the Court, having examined the evidence and arguments does not see any error in the reasoning of the contested sentence and the conclusion reached therein regarding the liability of Banco Mare Nostrum.  Therefore the First Instance Sentence must be maintained”


BANCO MARE NOSTRUM has 20 working days from the date of notification of the Sentence, which was 30 May 2016, to comply with the Sentence or to file a Cassation Appeal to the Supreme Court.

Although any appeal must be submitted strictly within the 20 working day deadline, we may not receive notification of an Appeal or of a firm sentence from the Court for a few weeks after the deadline due to the workload of the Court.

If a Cassation Appeal to the Supreme Court is filed by the defendant it will be necessary for us to file an Opposition to the Appeal on your behalf.



Like 0




2 Comments


ads said:
18 July 2016 @ 15:04

In this case Maria, was the interest awarded backdated to date monies were deposited as opposed to date of claim?


Keith110 said:
18 July 2016 @ 16:00

Off-plan deposit in this case was paid in 2006. In June 2014 the First Instance Judge awarded interest at 6% per annum (not at the legal rate) from August 2011. That was the date on which the first Burofax was sent to the Developer & Bank.

The Provincial Appeal Court confirmed the First Instance Sentence in full.


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