The Council of State to Assess the Claim of a Majorcan Company

Pedro
By Pedro
2 Min Read
Disclosure: This website may contain affiliate or sponsored links, which means I may earn income from the link placements. Links are vetted for safety and compliance.



Company Claims €74,200 for Disruption During Fuerteventura Port Works

⭐ Want More Canarian News?
Add Canarian News to your Preferred Sources in Google.
Takes just a few seconds

The Supreme Court has ordered the Council of State to address a €74,200 claim from a company that supplied fuel to vessels at Fuerteventura port. This claim arises from the company’s cessation of operations during construction work.

In 2021, the installation of new fencing at the Cruise Dock was carried out to comply with the International Maritime Organization’s regulations for the protection of ships and port facilities.

Initially, the company was told to suspend its services, but later it was suggested that the construction would not affect its operations. The firm argues this constituted a breach of trust.

This legal case began in 2022, during which the Port Authority of Las Palmas maintained that public entities, such as port authorities, were not required to obtain the Council of State’s report on claims.

However, the Provincial Court of Las Palmas, the High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands, and now the Supreme Court disagree. They require the process to be paused until the Council of State provides a binding opinion.

The Supreme Court pointed out that the current threshold for issuing such an opinion is €50,000, an increase from the previous amount of €6,000.

The Port Authority of Las Palmas contended that the opinion was only necessary for claims directed at the national administration, not public entities, citing a previous Valencia Ports ruling.

The company referenced new legislation that mandates a decision from the Council of State for requests exceeding €50,000 and requires it from any government-dependent entity.

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling clarified that there is no overstepping of authority, but rather a legal provision explicitly stated in the Organic Law of the Council of State.



Source link

Share This Article
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

twenty − seventeen =