# MATKATOR — DP 552/2025 → DP 711/2025 PROCEDURAL CONTINUITY ADDENDUM **Created:** 16 August 2026 **Status:** INTERNAL CANONICAL ADDENDUM — NOT AUTO-PUBLISHED **Controls:** Supplements `archive/MATKATOR_DP552_ETJ163_MASA_ACTIVA_SOURCE_DIGEST_16AUG2026.md`. Where this addendum supplies later procedural-status evidence, it controls over the base digest’s earlier statement that post-DP-552 status was not yet located. It does **not** alter the evidential classification of the underlying allegations. --- ## 1. Purpose A connected-Gmail source-completion pass after the ten-document ingest located the procedural bridge from **Diligencias Previas 552/2025, Juzgado de Instrucción nº 2 de San Cristóbal de La Laguna**, into the later **Diligencias Previas 711/2025, Juzgado de Instrucción nº 2 de Arrecife**. Future threads must not treat DP 552/2025 and DP 711/2025 as unrelated complaints merely because the proceeding number/island changed. The presently located record supports an inhibition/transfer chain. Equally, procedural continuity does not prove the truth of Matkator’s allegations or criminal responsibility. --- ## 2. Verified procedural chain ### 20 February 2025 — original complaint The source set preserves the complaint filed for Matkator against Hotel New Trend, S.L. and Canarian Hospitality, S.L. concerning alleged unauthorised alteration, exclusion from and commercialisation of Matkator property within Sun Park / MYND Yaiza. **Classification:** VERIFIED DOCUMENTARY FACT as to filing/content; underlying conduct remains PARTY ALLEGATION unless independently established. ### 27 February 2025 — inhibition from La Laguna to Arrecife A later LexNET personation package expressly states that an **Auto of 27 February 2025** from Juzgado de Instrucción nº 2 de San Cristóbal de La Laguna agreed inhibition in favour of the Arrecife courts on territorial-competence grounds. Connected-source anchor: - Gmail message **`1958b2f6e1eaf605`**; - attachment **`1202510755336620_20250312122758000_RESUMEN.pdf`**; - LexNET description: **`PERSONACION EN PREVIAS POR INHIBICION DE LA LAGUNA`**; - origin identified as **DP 552/2025**. **Classification:** VERIFIED PROCEDURAL FACT at the registered-personation/reference level. The signed native 27-Feb Auto itself remains a priority retrieval item. ### 4 / 6 / reported 7 March 2025 — expansion version control Two materially similar expansion versions are preserved, dated **4 March** and **6 March 2025**; the latter expressly carries DP 552/2025. The 13-Mar ETJ filing says the expansion was presented on **7 March 2025**. **Control:** do not select one PDF as the controlling filed version without the filing receipt / filed-stamped copy. This is a source-status reconciliation issue, not evidence of impropriety. ### 12 March 2025 — Arrecife personation The connected LexNET package records personation after the inhibition. This establishes procedural continuity but not merits treatment. ### 13 March 2025 — ETJ 163/2020 bridge The uploaded `250313 escrito adjuntando ampliación de la denuncia fda.pdf` tells JPI nº3 La Laguna in **ETJ 163/2020** that the 20-Feb complaint had become DP 552/2025 and that the expanded criminal allegations were new facts said to bear on execution/auction validity, valuation, expert evidence and possible prejudicialidad penal. **Classification:** VERIFIED DOCUMENTARY FACT as to the civil submission and requested consequences; responsive ETJ orders are required to establish what the civil court did with it. ### 17 March 2025 — provisional dismissal in the Arrecife track The later appellate pleading located in connected Gmail identifies an **Auto of 17 March 2025** as the order that declared the criminal proceeding ended and provisionally dismissed it. **Classification:** VERIFIED PROCEDURAL FACT through later filed appellate material. Obtain/read the signed 17-Mar order before characterising its exact reasoning/scope. ### April–May 2025 — reform / queja route Connected Gmail preserves review/procedural-dispute material: - Gmail **`19678aab030de28c`** — `Matkator - Recurso reforma sobreseimiento`, attachment `202504025 Reforma.docx`; - Gmail **`196e8ea643b8c0fd`** — `Queja Instrucción 2 Arrecife DP 711/2025`, attachment `20250516 Queja.pdf`; - Gmail **`196f9316ec0226f0`** — later counsel correspondence carrying DP 711/2025 court attachments. These establish existence of review/procedural challenge, not that the dismissal or later handling was legally erroneous. ### 25 September 2025 — reform denied The later appeal states an **Auto of 25 September 2025** dismissed the reform against the 17-Mar provisional dismissal. **Classification:** VERIFIED PROCEDURAL FACT through later filed appellate material; exact reasoning must come from the signed 25-Sep order. ### 3 October 2025 — appeal to Audiencia Provincial de Las Palmas Connected Gmail preserves `20250929 Apelacion.docx`, subsequently forwarded as presented. The pleading is headed **Diligencias Previas 711/2025, Juzgado de Instrucción nº2 de Arrecife**. It seeks reversal/nullity of the 25-Sep order and continuation of investigation, and expressly links the case back to the 20-Feb complaint / March expansion originally handled as DP 552/2025 in La Laguna. Retrieval anchors: - Gmail **`199a97d82bb411aa`** — `[MATKATOR] Apelación sobreseimiento Arrecife`, attachment `20250929 Apelacion.docx`; - Gmail **`199a9ac58e800ffa`** — forwarded/presented copy. **Current controlled status:** appeal filed; **no signed Audiencia Provincial outcome has been located in the reviewed source set**. Do not describe DP 711/2025 as finally closed or reopened unless the AP decision/current docket is obtained. --- ## 3. Proceeding-identity rule Use unless a later certified docket contradicts it: > **DP 552/2025 (JI nº2 San Cristóbal de La Laguna) is the identified originating La Laguna proceeding for the 20-Feb-2025 Matkator complaint. The located personation record states that an Auto of 27-Feb-2025 inhibited the matter to Arrecife. The later Arrecife criminal track is identified as DP 711/2025 before JI nº2 Arrecife. A provisional dismissal dated 17-Mar-2025 was challenged by reform and then by appeal filed in October 2025; the Audiencia Provincial outcome is not located in the present source set.** Do **not** say: - DP 552 and DP 711 are separate merits proceedings unless a certified docket proves severance/new initiation; - inhibition validated or rejected the complaint; - provisional dismissal proves factual allegations false; - reform/appeal proves judicial wrongdoing; - filing an appeal means investigation is presently reopened; - any named person committed an offence merely because denounced. --- ## 4. Relationship to ETJ 163/2020 The 13-Mar-2025 filing creates a documented **criminal → civil-execution evidential bridge**. Future threads must separately answer: 1. **What was submitted?** — source-supported by the filing. 2. **Was it admitted/read/served?** — filing/service record required. 3. **What did ETJ court decide?** — signed responsive order required. 4. **Did DP 711 provisional dismissal affect ETJ treatment?** — later ETJ reasoning required. 5. **What was physical/registry state of executed asset at each decision date?** — independent title/expert evidence required. Do not leap from existence of criminal proceedings to automatic civil nullity/suspension. --- ## 5. Relationship to 2020–2021 Concurso 36/2012 estate-preservation record The ten-document digest demonstrates an earlier, separate notice/preservation track concerning alleged works, demolition, access restriction and LPB active-estate condition. It is relevant to chronology/institutional notice but must not be fused with Matkator’s 2025 extraconcursal property complaint. Maintain: - **LPB estate** ≠ **Matkator fincas**; - **Aweswell shareholder application** ≠ **Matkator criminal complaint**; - **CAM 2021 creditor/54-unit position** ≠ **HNT 2022 structural-operation role**; - **Canarian Hospitality operation allegation** ≠ **HNT/CAM legal identity**; - **2021 refusal of expert/inspection in liquidation posture** ≠ merits ruling that later Matkator units were lawfully transformed or no damage occurred. --- ## 6. Mandatory adverse / counter-position preservation When using this chain, preserve at least: - the 2-May-2018 DP 1132 order provisionally archived two March-2018 damage episodes for lack of known author; - CAM’s February-2021 filing said it was only a concurso creditor as regards LPB assets, separately owned 54 units and reformed only its own units under licence; - the AC said it had not delivered LPB assets to CAM and treated CAM as another unit owner with access rights; - the 24-Feb-2021 Mercantile Auto declined expert/inspection relief in the liquidation posture then before it; - the 17-Mar-2025 Arrecife track was provisionally dismissed and the 25-Sep reform was denied according to later appeal material; - appeal outcome remains unverified. These points do not settle the dispute; they prevent one-sided pleading records from being converted into established fact. --- ## 7. Priority missing primary material 1. signed **27-Feb-2025 inhibition Auto** from JI nº2 La Laguna; 2. certified transfer/remisión showing **DP 552/2025 → DP 711/2025**; 3. complete filed-stamped complaint/expansion package and annex inventory; 4. signed **17-Mar-2025 provisional-dismissal Auto**; 5. signed **25-Sep-2025 reform-denial Auto**; 6. complete May-2025 queja and AP disposition, if any; 7. filing receipt and AP roll for **3-Oct-2025 appeal**; 8. present AP Las Palmas docket and signed decision/current status; 9. ETJ 163/2020 receipts and responsive orders on 27-Feb / 13-Mar-2025 submissions; 10. full historical/current Registry/deed chain for fincas 8497, 8498, 8584, 8588; 11. independent physical/Registry/Cadastre expert map of alleged apartment-to-room transformation; 12. HNT / Canarian Hospitality / MYND contracting, unit-authority and room-level revenue/accounting records. Absence from current connected-source pass means **not located**, not non-existent. --- ## 8. Retrieval terms ### Repository - `MATKATOR_DP552_ETJ163_MASA_ACTIVA_SOURCE_DIGEST_16AUG2026` - `MATKATOR_DP552_DP711_PROCEDURAL_CONTINUITY_ADDENDUM_16AUG2026` - `DP 552/2025` - `DP 711/2025` - `ETJ 163/2020` - `fincas 8584 8588 8497 8498` - `Auto Destruccion Masa Activa 24FEB2021` - `AutoAcosta MatosInstruccion` ### Gmail - `"552/2025"` - `"711/2025"` - `"PERSONACION EN PREVIAS POR INHIBICION DE LA LAGUNA"` - `"Matkator - Recurso reforma sobreseimiento"` - `"Queja Instrucción 2 Arrecife DP 711/2025"` - `"Apelación sobreseimiento Arrecife"` ### File Library/uploads Re-query the ten exact filenames catalogued in the base digest. Repository summaries do not substitute for signed court orders/native correspondence when exact propositions matter. --- ## 9. Propagation rule For future updates involving Matkator title, DP 552, DP 711, ETJ 163, Concurso 36/2012 estate preservation or DP 1132: `primary source → classify → base digest/addendum → global correction/missing-evidence/proceedings registers → affected storyline → public page only if justified`. Until every global register is refreshed, this addendum is the **controlling internal continuity record** for the DP 552/2025 → DP 711/2025 procedural bridge and the later appeal-status limitation. --- ## 10. Deletion-safety conclusion Once merged, a fresh ChatGPT can recover the origin proceeding, inhibition to Arrecife, later DP number, provisional dismissal/review sequence, ETJ bridge, adverse/counter-position controls, unresolved AP status and exact connected-source retrieval anchors without relying on conversational memory.