Author: Xavier Gil Pecharromán

Source: El Economista

The resolution from the General Director of the Cadastre, dated November 10, 2021, regarding the reference values of rural properties for 2022, “contains the necessary elements to determine the reference value of each property,” according to the Central Economic-Administrative Court (TEAC), in two resolutions both dated December 21, 2022.

The Court considers that the mandate given by the legislator has been fulfilled, based on the guidelines outlined in the transitional provision nine of the Consolidated Text of the Law on the Cadastre (TRLCI).

It concludes that the Cadastre Director does not approach the matter in an abstract manner, but rather specifies the precise elements for setting values.

TEAC determines that these criteria follow the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court concerning cadastral value reports, and concludes that the circumstance of each reference value being applied multiple times during its validity (for the year 2022) does not invalidate it in this case, nor does the fact that this act of setting reference values is a prerequisite for further acts, as it does not equate it to a legal norm.

The members reason that “the Annual Report on the Rural Real Estate Market (IAMIR 2021) requires the involvement of collegiate bodies within the cadastral sphere and is part of the technical work, preliminary and necessary for the preparation of the resolution; while invested with a presumption of legal accuracy (unless proven otherwise), it can be challenged.”

Additionally, they reason that it is absolutely relevant for the purposes outlined in the third final provision of the TRLCI, that the average value modules resulting from its analysis are also documented in the final resolution, as the reference value is based on them.

Following these arguments, the Court rules that “considering that the market report has been taken into account, documented in the submitted administrative file, and not disproven in its substance, as there is no evidence of any mismatch in the adopted average values.”

It also considers that drafting a technical document of this nature involves creating a territorial valuation model assigned to an administrative body, within its competential scope and whose impartiality is assumed, in which competent and fully qualified technicians for this task are involved. Therefore, it is necessary to reject, without further consideration, the claim for nullity.