- within Criminal Law topic(s)
- with Senior Company Executives, HR and Inhouse Counsel
- with readers working within the Accounting & Consultancy and Law Firm industries
The definitive annulment of the LEZ opens the door for affected citizens and businesses to claim damages arising from the application of a bylaw declared contrary to the principle of proportionality
The Supreme Court has refused to admit the cassation appeal lodged by Madrid City Council against the judgment of the Madrid High Court of Justice annulling the provisions governing the Low Emissions Zone (LEZ) across the municipality. As a result, the annulment of the bylaw has become final, opening a scenario with highly significant practical consequences for a large number of citizens and businesses.
The High Court of Justice found at the time that the economic impact assessment carried out prior to the bylaw’s approval was manifestly insufficient: the City Council failed to weigh adequately the balance of benefits and costs, nor did it consider less restrictive alternatives of equivalent effect. The court further underlined that the bylaw disproportionately affected citizens with lower purchasing power, in breach of the just transition principle enshrined in the Climate Change and Energy Transition Act.
Two avenues of action are now available. On the one hand, the challenge or review of penalties imposed under the annulled bylaw. On the other, and arguably the most significant in economic terms, a claim for patrimonial liability against the City Council for the losses arising from the application of a rule that the courts have declared contrary to the principle of proportionality.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]