The Supreme Court dismisses the request for compensation for financial liability of the State legislator against the effects of RDL 13/2018, which amends the regulation of VTCs.
This resolution discusses a case of patrimonial responsibility of the State for the entry into force of the Real Decreto-Ley 13/2018, of 28 September, which modifies the Ley 16/1987, of Ordinación de los Transportes Terrestres (Land Transport Law), changing the ride-hailing regulation, in relation to 2,1992 authorizations to exercice this service that the plantiff was titular, directly or by its subsidiaries.
By this Real Decreto-Ley, the ride-hailing regulation is restricted to interurban routes, leaving the urban regulation to the Autonomous Communities, and establishing a transitional regime for 4 years for which the former licences still have validity in the city centres.
The plaintiff alleges that the act is a delegation of competences from the State to the Autonomous Communities, for which there’s a special procedure, and that it is contrary to proportionality and equality principles and affects the free competition and free provision of services. Therefore, it is entitled to be compensated for the economic damages which cause this regulation to the company.
The Court, after exposing the normative history of the regulation of ride-hailing services, considers that the norm has no confiscatory effects, because licences and authorisations don’t consolidate acquired rights and therefore there is no harm (leaving apart the economic value in the market of the authorisations). The Court also denies that there’s a breach of confidence and good faith in the approval of the Real Decreto-Ley, because of the transitional regime and, in purity, there’s no effective damage, but a forthcoming and hypothetical one, as the substantial regulation of urban ride-hailing is yet to be determined by the Autonomous Communities.
The decision follows exposing that there’s no delegation of competences from the State, but an adaptation to the distribution of competences stated by the Spanish Constitution, which defines urban transportation and inside the Autonomous Community as of its competence (art. 148.1.5). The Court also references the Organic Law 5/1987, which transfers to the Autonomous Communities transport and cable competences.
In last place, the decision argues that there’s no breach of equality and proportionality principles, nor affectation to competition law, as the Real Decreto-Ley doesn’t extinguish the ride-hailing service authorisation but adjusts its regulation to the State competences. The substantial regulation will be approved by the Autonomous Communities.
Ride-hailing services are immersed in regulatory changes which creates large litigiousness. And other resolution in this field is the judgment in case C-50/21, Prestige and Limousine, of t he Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concerning the local regulation of PHV services within the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona (AMB) (Reglamento de ordenación de la actividad de transporte urbano discrecional de viajeros discrecional de viajeros con conductor de vehículos de hasta nueve plazas – RVTC), which restricts the activity of PHV within the AMB. At Pareja I Associats, Advocats, we provide a legal opinion about the judgment, which can be read at: https://pareja-advocats.com/en/blog/the-court-of-justice-of-the-eu-rules-that-limiting-the-number-of-licences-for-private-hire-vehicles-within-the-amb-is-contrary-to-european-union-law/
Sentència del Tribunal Suprem 3409/2023, de 17 de juliol de 2023.
