Más incertidumbreplazo de prescripción de la acción de responsabilidad patrimonial por anulación judicial de licencias. Comentario a la sentencia del tribunal supremo, 1160/2021, de 22 de septiembre

  1. Salvador Martín Ros 1
  2. Salvador María Martín Valdivia 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Jaén.
Revista de urbanismo y edificación

ISSN: 1576-9380

Datum der Publikation: 2022

Nummer: 48

Art: Artikel

Andere Publikationen in: Revista de urbanismo y edificación


Índice Dialnet de Revistas

  • Jahr 2022
  • Impact Factor der Zeitschrift: 0,090
  • Bereich: ARQUITECTURA Quartil: C3 Position im Bereich: 18/42
  • Bereich: DERECHO Quartil: C3 Position im Bereich: 213/366
  • Bereich: DERECHO ADMINISTRATIVO Quartil: C3 Position im Bereich: 27/40


The judgment of the Supreme Court of September 22, 2021 has not addressed either with the desirable depth or with the intention of completeness a entrenched problem that has been arising since the promulgation of Law 30/1992 and whose article 142.4 - and its successive wording - has been interpreted very differently depending on the assumptions. The aspect that has entailed the most difficulties in judicial practice over the last 30 years has not been in itself the dies a quo of the computation to trigger the patrimonial responsibility in cases of annulment of administrative acts, nor if it is at the time of the pronouncement or in that of its notification (dichotomy resolved with the current 67.1 of the LPAC, in favor of the second), but when it should be understood by the procedural parties involved that the sentence reaches such firmness for the purposes of initiating the term. However, the High Court has not taken into due consideration the conflict generated around this issue, despite the fact that according to the order of admission and the question that presented an objective appeal for the formation of jurisprudence, it could well have resolved it in more precise and "definitive" terms. An interesting opportunity for the unification of criteria has therefore been lost.