Almost three years after the construction on the coast of the Valencian Community was limited with the decree of the PATIVEL plan, thus leaving many projects on the first lines of beach in areas like ours, the Superior Court of Justice of the Comunitat Valenciana cancels it after the appeal of a company.
The First Section of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community (TSJCV) has declared the Territorial Action Plan of the Green Coastal Infrastructure (PATIVEL) of the Region void, as it is contrary to law Valenciana, approved by decree of the Consell on May 4, 2018.
The judgment, which upholds the appeal presented by a company, concludes that it does not exist in the administrative file, as required by the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court, "An economic-financial study that reflects the costs of implementing PATIVEL and the economic repercussions that it entails for the affected properties and for the municipalities that must develop it, nor that foresees the possible patrimonial responsibilities that the declassification of soil that carries out ".
Likewise, as a second ground for nullity, the magistrates point out that the project violates the Law for Equality between Women and Men by not including an impact assessment report on the basis of gender, as is required in all regulatory projects, including instruments of urban planning.
Said argument, according to the judgment, can be extrapolated to the absence in the PATIVEL processing and approval file of the required reports on the impact that action may have on childhood, adolescence and family.
Finally, the First Section of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the TSJCV understands that another reason for nullity is the fact that the plan has not been subjected to a true strategic environmental and territorial evaluation and omits the different possible alternatives.
"The consequences that PATIVEL may have for the population, human health, flora, fauna, biodiversity, geodiversity and other factors mentioned are not analyzed"The court specifies in its resolution, which has the private vote of one of the magistrates and which can be appealed in cassation before the Supreme Court.