Madrid Court of First Instance no. 42 has just ordered, in a judgment notified at the end of February, a well-known national developer to pay compensation to a homeowners’ association in Boadilla del Monte in the sum of €1,081,951.04, plus statutory interest.
The reason for the ruling, as set out by the judge, lies in the developer-seller’s breach of its obligations when handing over the homes and communal areas, as these have been showing a series of defects, in the form of damp and water ingress, which make them unfit or unsuitable for the purpose for which they were purchased, thereby resulting in a breach of contract for which the developer-seller must answer.
The judge rejects every one of the exculpatory arguments put forward by the defendant: it cannot hide behind the after-sales service provided by the building contractor to evade its liability, the poor repairs carried out by the contractor on the residential development are unacceptable, and the expert report submitted by the developer is not taken into consideration.
On the other hand, the judge considers proven all the damage identified by the owners, as set out in several expert reports and items of evidence submitted to the proceedings by DPcon Reclamación Daños Constructivos, to which the judge gives greater credibility because of their rigour, thoroughness and closer fidelity to reality.
The court not only accepted the damage we proved in the lawsuit, but also the repair method proposed by our expert, holding the developer responsible for it, since it was mainly due to failures to comply with the Technical Building Code, which the developer breached and which were mandatory. The judgment reasons as follows:
since the existence of the leaks has not been denied (article 281.3 of the LEC), and their causes have been perfectly defined, in this court’s view, by the claimant’s expert report, document 6 of the lawsuit must be followed in order to determine what works must be carried out to correct them and what valuation must be taken into account to carry them out.
Indeed, in each of the defects analysed, and contrary to the defendant’s position, the DPCON expert identifies the exact cause of the leaks, explaining why water accumulates and that this stems from the inadequate execution of each of the items of work affected by damp, a workmanship defect evidenced by the breach of the Technical Building Code in each of these areas, sometimes with several breaches combined, and which is attributable, by way of breach of contract, to the defendant developer.
The defendant’s expert argued in this respect that the fact that the CTE is not complied with does not mean that there is a construction defect or that this is the cause of the defect, since the Code is performance-based rather than prescriptive. This statement, however, contradicts article 2 of Royal Decree 314/2006 of 17 March, approving the Technical Building Code, which establishes that the CTE is mandatory in Spain for all new building works, as well as for significant refurbishments and renovations affecting safety, habitability or energy efficiency. It has regulated structural aspects, fire, insulation and health since 2006, meaning that it was in force when these works began and when they were completed (documents 4 and 5 of the lawsuit). In any event, since the defects have occurred in those areas where the guidelines set by the CTE were not followed, there is clearly a cause-and-effect relationship that is perfectly determinable and has been determined.
The judgment, which is not yet final and which orders the developer – one of the largest in the country – to pay the homeowners’ association a total of €1,081,951.04 plus statutory interest, has been received with enthusiasm by the residents of the building.
The lawsuit that gave rise to the proceedings was drafted and signed by the firm specialising in construction defect claims, DPCON. In addition to the success of having the claim upheld, DPcon Reclamación Daños Constructivos congratulates the Madrid court on the speed with which it handled the proceedings: the lawsuit was filed in February 2025 and barely twelve months later the judgment concluding the first instance has already been notified, which is certainly desirable but not very common in the Spanish judicial landscape.
If you have a problem with your residential development, contact us.
Any questions?