FEDERACION ESPAÑOLA DE MUNICIPIOS Y PROVINCIAS
- Contact |
- Who are we? |
- Site Map |
- Job offers
The municipalities can apply for entry preventive seizure of property outside its municipal
A Case of Audiencia Provincial de Alicante, dated 28 December 2009, has upheld an appeal brought by the city of Javea, and ordered annotation practices preventive arrest of a well located outside the territorial scope of municipality. The ruling reverses a decision of the Directorate General of Registries and Notaries and qualifications of the Registrar of the Property, in refusing the entry preventive embargo requested by the City Council
The Case comes to decide on an issue of concern to local councils and has had major negative effects for them, especially from the Order issued by the Directorate General of Registries and Notaries dated March 9, 2006. Since then, property registrars began to reject the attempt by the city councils of annotation practice preventive seizure of property located outside its territory. Until then, the usual practice was to allow the application of such endorsements without getting negative rating in this regard. However, following the publication of the resolution, although in some cases could continue, most registrars have refused to practice.
The rejection by the registrars has been a decrease in speed of implementation of collection procedures and increase costs for municipalities. This situation has meant that, although the municipalities have recognized the ability to agree to lock assets situated outside its territory to ensure efficiency in tax collection, the reality is that, unable to apply for entry via direct embargo, are slowed enforcement procedures of the Local Finance.
The description of the property registrars and the Directorate General of Registries and Notaries is based, for the rejection of the preventive note the embargo, the contents of Art. 8.3 of Royal Decree Legislativo2/2004, 5 March, approving the revised text of the Law Regulating the local treasuries. Registrars infer from this Act that the municipalities are not competent to perform executive actions and therefore collection of engagement but directly on property located outside its municipal boundaries.
However, the Chamber of the Audiencia Provincial de Alicante does not share the above criteria and states that one thing is the lock of goods and other concrete measures to ensure the same. In their legal arguments, refers to the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court sitting in the doctrine concerning the lien exists legally since the judicial authority law decrees, and independently of entry in the Register, whose endorsement may not condition its existence, nor take it for a constitutive value.
The Court argues further that this is the legal standard underlying the Civil Procedure Act 1 / 2000, under which the lien will be deemed since it is decreed by the court or reviews the description of goods in The minutes of the diligence of attachment, although not yet adopted security measures or advertising of the lock.
After an analysis of the concept and the legal nature of the embargo on Spanish law in force, the Provincial Court concludes that preventive annotation interested embargo by the City and denied both by the Registrar of the Property as per the Directorate General of Registries and Notaries, has no nature of executive action but must be predicated only of the embargo decided, being that a simple security measure. Therefore reverses the decision of the Directorate General of Registries and Notaries, and the criticism of the Property Registrar, commanding the practice of preventive note embargo requested by the City for property located outside its territorial .
The FEMP takes a positive view that the decision to perform an interpretation of existing legislation that recognizes the autonomy and capacity for action afforded to the councils, and that is in tune with the right to register that collects art. 8 TRLRHL and duty of establishing inter-governmental collaboration in tax collection
The rejection by the registrars has been a decrease in speed of implementation of collection procedures and increase costs for municipalities. This situation has meant that, although the municipalities have recognized the ability to agree to lock assets situated outside its territory to ensure efficiency in tax collection, the reality is that, unable to apply for entry via direct embargo, are slowed enforcement procedures of the Local Finance.
The description of the property registrars and the Directorate General of Registries and Notaries is based, for the rejection of the preventive note the embargo, the contents of Art. 8.3 of Royal Decree Legislativo2/2004, 5 March, approving the revised text of the Law Regulating the local treasuries. Registrars infer from this Act that the municipalities are not competent to perform executive actions and therefore collection of engagement but directly on property located outside its municipal boundaries.
However, the Chamber of the Audiencia Provincial de Alicante does not share the above criteria and states that one thing is the lock of goods and other concrete measures to ensure the same. In their legal arguments, refers to the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court sitting in the doctrine concerning the lien exists legally since the judicial authority law decrees, and independently of entry in the Register, whose endorsement may not condition its existence, nor take it for a constitutive value.
The Court argues further that this is the legal standard underlying the Civil Procedure Act 1 / 2000, under which the lien will be deemed since it is decreed by the court or reviews the description of goods in The minutes of the diligence of attachment, although not yet adopted security measures or advertising of the lock.
After an analysis of the concept and the legal nature of the embargo on Spanish law in force, the Provincial Court concludes that preventive annotation interested embargo by the City and denied both by the Registrar of the Property as per the Directorate General of Registries and Notaries, has no nature of executive action but must be predicated only of the embargo decided, being that a simple security measure. Therefore reverses the decision of the Directorate General of Registries and Notaries, and the criticism of the Property Registrar, commanding the practice of preventive note embargo requested by the City for property located outside its territorial .
The FEMP takes a positive view that the decision to perform an interpretation of existing legislation that recognizes the autonomy and capacity for action afforded to the councils, and that is in tune with the right to register that collects art. 8 TRLRHL and duty of establishing inter-governmental collaboration in tax collection
