Yes, we did. A judge in Marbella thinks that our client should have completed ( with no First Occupation License) and that as the Golf Course was not mentioned in the contract document ( just in publicity), it is therefore not part of the contract agreement.
Very much against Land Act in Spain regarding planning licenses and estate transmission and also against the doctrine of our Supreme Court regarding the linking character of publicity.
The best reaction to this has come from a colleague ( I am ommitting his name in respect to his right to a good week-end 
): "do we have the judges we deserve?"
We are determined to go all the route through till Supreme Court, we mainly pursue clarification of what these two articles, contained in Law 57/68 means:
Art. 2.- In those contracts where the parties agree on anticipated amounts the developer must expressly state:
a) That the developer will give back to the buyer all the advanced mounts plus the 6%, in cases where the construction fails to tart or end within the agreed deadline, or the certificate of habitability is not granted.
b) Reference to the bank guarantee or insurance contract, indicating the name of the Bank or the Insurance Company.
c) Specification of the Bank or financial institution and the account number where the buyer's money is deposited.
At the signing of the contract, the developer will give the buyer the document that contains the guarantee (the Aval or the Insurance contract) and the document must have a reference to the amount that is anticipated.
Art. 3. - If the deadlines for starting or finishing are not met, the buyer can choose between cancelling the contract with the devolution of advanced amounts plus legal annual interests, or to concede a time extension, which will be stated in an additional clause in the contract, specifying the new deadline with the date for finishing the construction and completion.
Come on !
Maria
www.costaluzlawyers.es
 By SantiMB.jpg)
Neglect among trees.Cercs, Barcelona, Spain by SantiMB at Flickr.com