The review of a final sentence was denied despite the fact that the appellant...

nijhumnishita03

The Supreme Court has rejected the review of a final sentence despite the fact that the appellant provided a document that supported her. The High Court considers that the woman could have presented said document before the sentence was handed down and, therefore, there is no room for review.


The appellant claimed Phone Number Data compensation from the Administration for financial liability. She claimed to have suffered damage as a result of inactivity in the eviction of some "squatters" who were living in an apartment that, according to the claimant, was owned by the Administration of the Autonomous Community of Madrid.

Her claim for compensation was rejected, so the woman filed a lawsuit, without success.



The Court bases the rejection of his claim on the documentation on file, from which it was deduced that the apartment that was said to be occupied did not belong to the defendant autonomous administration, since it sold it in 1987. However, after the ruling was handed down , the woman obtains a certification from the Property Registry in which the property appears registered as property of the "Madrid Housing Institute" since 1998.


"The Court bases the denial of his claim on the documentation in the record" (Photo: E&J)

Final judgment review
The appellant seeks a review of the final sentence. Invokes article 102.1 a) of the Jurisdictional Law 29/1998 - LJCA - which establishes that there will be a review of a final sentence "if after it has been pronounced, decisive documents are recovered, not provided due to force majeure or by the act of the party in whose favor it was issued.”