Francisco Javier Ramón analyses the latest judicial setback to Madrid’s Low Emissions Zone

The Supreme Court has refused to admit the cassation appeal lodged by Madrid City Council against the judgment of the Madrid High Court of Justice annulling the provisions governing the Low Emissions Zone (LEZ) across the municipality. As a result, the annulment of the bylaw has become final, opening a scenario with highly significant practical consequences for a large number of citizens and businesses.

The High Court of Justice found at the time that the economic impact assessment carried out prior to the bylaw’s approval was manifestly insufficient: the City Council failed to weigh adequately the balance of benefits and costs, nor did it consider less restrictive alternatives of equivalent effect. The court further underlined that the bylaw disproportionately affected citizens with lower purchasing power, in breach of the just transition principle enshrined in the Climate Change and Energy Transition Act.

Two avenues of action are now available. On the one hand, the challenge or review of penalties imposed under the annulled bylaw. On the other, and arguably the most significant in economic terms, a claim for patrimonial liability against the City Council for the losses arising from the application of a rule that the courts have declared contrary to the principle of proportionality.

Francisco Javier Ramón, partner at Toda & Nel-lo and specialist in Public, Administrative and Regulatory Law, analyses in detail the scope of this ruling and the specific actions available to those affected, in a column published in Cinco Días.

You can read it at the following link: Column | Cinco Días – A new blow to Madrid’s LEZ: what comes next?