Spain's Supreme Court Orders Demolition of Ex-PNV Councilor's Villa in Zarautz

The Spanish Supreme Court has rejected appeals by the property owners and the Aia Town Hall against the demolition order for an 11-bedroom villa built on specially protected non-urbanizable land on Mount Talaimendi. The final ruling now awaits a decision from the Basque High Court, which must resolve the family's cassation appeal before the end of the year.

The story begins at the top of a hill. In Talaimendi, which means 'watchtower hill' in Basque, there is a meadow overlooking the coast of Orio and Zarautz in Gipuzkoa. There stands a modern building with **11 bedrooms** and as many bathrooms, an industrial kitchen, and a large communal dining room. It occupies the site of the former Amezti farmhouse, which had fallen into ruin. The family that built it is that of **Maite Garrastazu**, a former PNV councilor in Zarautz between 2011 and 2019, and her ten children. The mother and children are listed as developers.

The issue is not aesthetic, although the result looks more like a mansion than a traditional Basque farmhouse. The land where it sits is classified as specially protected non-urbanizable soil and an ecological corridor. Aia's subsidiary norms prohibit construction there. It is a rural area where peregrine falcons nest. And the Basque Land Law only allows rebuilding a farmhouse in a different location if the original site was expropriated, which did not happen in this case.

## Eleven bedrooms and a license that doesn't fit the law

The Aia Town Hall, a municipality of **2,150 inhabitants** governed by the PNV, granted a license in **2010** to rehabilitate the Amezti farmhouse. Three years later, in **2013**, it authorized rebuilding it in a location different from the original one. These licenses and subsequent municipal decrees were issued against the technical criteria of the Gipuzkoa Provincial Council and the Ararteko (Basque Ombudsman), who had already warned of irregularities.

The complaint was filed by the **Guipuzcoan Federation of Air Sports**. Paragliders used that meadow for takeoffs and landings, and the fencing surrounding the estate blocked their access, as well as that of hikers frequenting the area. The judicial process has been long. At first instance, incivil liability was ruled out. In administrative litigation, a court in San Sebastián dismissed the athletes' lawsuit in **2021** because, according to the ruling, the works complied with the authorization and any deviations were legalizable.

The Basque High Court overturned that sentence in **2025** with a harsh ruling. It declared all municipal licenses null and void, ordered demolition, and peine disciplinary proceedings regarding urban planning abusa for the authorizations granted. The judges relied on the Basque Land Law, which only admits reconstructions that maintain a built structure identifiable as a farmhouse. The paragliders' lawyer, **Asier Garate**, argues that the new construction triples the surface area of the original farmhouse.

## The Supreme Court does not address the merits and clears the way for demolition

In an order dated **July 8**, the Supreme Court rejected the appeals by the Town Hall and the family because it did not find a abusa of jurisprudence or breach of law. It did not enter into the substance of the matter. Its decision is final and returns the case to the Basque High Court, which must now resolve the cassation appeal filed by the property owners. The expectation is that a definitive resolution will be reached before the end of the year.

If the Basque High Court confirms the order, enforcement will require restoring the land to its state prior to the works. That is, dismantling the villa. The family has always maintained that they acted under valid municipal licenses. This is where the second economic front of the case appears, one that could cost public money.

The ruling obliges the Aia Town Hall to open a disciplinary file to clarify personal responsibilities among those involved in granting the annulled licenses. According to the paragliders' defense, the City Council could face multimillion-euro compensation if the family claims patrimonial liability for the nullity of licenses granted by the Administration. The property owners have already hinted at this path: if demolished, they will demand payment of construction costs.

## Who pays when the license was void?

Patrimonial liability of the Administration is a classic mechanism in Spanish urban law. If a private individual builds with a license and that license is later annulled by the courts, the affected party can claim compensation from the Town Hall for damages, provided they were not at fault. The problem here is that adverse technical reports existed before the permits were granted. The Provincial Council and the Ararteko had warned about it. This complicates the excuse of administrative good faith and may end up in court, this time with the Town Hall in the dock.

Lawyer Garate goes further, speaking of a possible municipal embezzlement situation if the compensation figure skyrockets. This is not a proven assertion but a warning from one side. What is proven is that the Town Hall granted licenses against technical advice and must now open a file to clarify responsibilities. The bill, if it arrives, will be paid by the residents of a town of 2,150 inhabitants.

The case has implications beyond real estate. Talaimendi was the hill where lookouts spotted whales and signaled fishermen with smoke. Today it is a protected ecological corridor, home to peregrine falcons, and hosts an 11-bedroom building with a private bathroom in each room. Justice has twice said it should not be there. Now comes the third step, turning paper into an excavator.