1 · Master piece inventory
Every section and pieza opened in Concurso 36/2012, with identifier, opening date, current status and closure date where applicable.
AUTHORIZATION · COMPETITION · ORDER · DEED · REGISTRY · ACCOUNTS
What the court actually authorized and how it became the transaction registered in 2022
This register avoids compressing the 2022 result into one generic “adjudication order”. It reconstructs each act separately, identifies what remains missing from the court/LAJ record and requires a documentary bridge between judicial authorization, the legal/economic function of each figure, deed, Registry and accounts.
Central rule. Recognized insolvency credit ≠ mortgage liability ≠ third-bidder threshold ≠ debt stated as consideration for the dation ≠ registry value ≠ eventual surplus.
Method correction. Do not use “the 26 January 2022 adjudication order” as shorthand. Two signed clarification orders dated 26 January 2022 are located; definitive approval is Order 164/2021 of 18 May 2021. The 22 January notation inside deed 457 is an unresolved notarial inconsistency, not proof of a third order.
PARTIAL INVENTORY. The controlled public baseline contains 65 located 2016–2021 docket items. A separate 105-filename LexNET queue awaits document-level deduplication. Those figures must not be added together or presented as the certified docket.
New 2017–2021 source layer. Opening, plan, preservation, inspection and the two distinct 24-Feb-2021 orders are separated in the active-estate dossier, with redacted text, contradiction and open-source controls.
Located baseline from 2016. The initial cutoff is 2016—earlier than the 2017 convenio phase. The 65-item docket baseline separates judicial/LAJ acts, party/AC filings, annexes and one connected external complaint. It includes a redacted OCR of the convenio proposal.
Denominator refresh. The searchable 37-page body of the 15-Jan-2013 Article 75 report is located, as is an internally dated 8-Feb-2019 conclusion application pending receipt/disposition. A bounded 2021–2022 sweep also located 105 unique LexNET provider-package filenames. Package filename is not unique act: the packages are not mechanically added to the 65 nodes.
Adverse-record and completeness control. The adverse 24-Nov-2015 Pink/Monterecco judgment, 23-Jul-2019 AP order, dismissals of 12-May-2020 and 6-May/15-Oct-2021, and 18-May-2021 CAM approval must accompany the criticism. The principal unresolved limitation is that no signed electronic index under article 47.3 of RDL 6/2023, official relation of procedural acts under article 46.2, or equivalent certified per-piece export for Concurso 36/2012 has been produced to us or located in the corpus. This is therefore the complete digest of the sources currently located—not yet a legally complete docket denominator. Non-production does not establish nonexistence, loss, suppression or alteration.
PUBLIC RECORD-CLOSURE REQUEST · COURT OFFICE / LAJ
Please produce the native official outputs that can close this gap
This is a finite access and reconciliation request, not an invitation to create a new narrative chronology. Articles 46.2 and 47.3–4 of RDL 6/2023 identify existing digital-file outputs; article 234 LOPJ and articles 4–5 of Regulation 1/2005 govern access by parties and persons who demonstrate a direct legitimate interest.
2 · Signed electronic index
The article 47.3 signed electronic index for the main file and for every section/pieza, preserving official identifiers, dates and integrity metadata.
3 · Official act-tracking export
The article 46.2 relation of procedural acts, resolution dates and status information, including filing, receipt, disposition, service, appeal and finality links.
4 · Electronic and legacy exception inventory
A complete electronic copy or download manifest, plus a list of paper records, annexes, exhibits, hearing minutes, recordings or other components not incorporated in the electronic file.
5 · Priority testimony chains
The complete 2018 and 2021–2022 testimony/implementation chains, including the 18-May-2021 appearance, post-deed court communication, mandates, Registry, bank and accounting records.
6 · Reasoned negative response where necessary
If an output cannot be supplied, identify the systems and pieces searched, the legal or technical restriction, whether the output exists and the competent review route.
Request and response status
Evidential boundary. The 20-Aug agreement records ATLANTE preservation and traceability for incorporated information. That makes the requested comparison testable. It does not prove that every historical component was incorporated, or that any missing component was lost, suppressed or altered.
What the 2013 insolvency-administrator report adds
A mixed cooperation record
The administrator called documentary delivery “not acceptable” because of delay and omissions. The same report says the representative attended every requested meeting, relations were “cordial and fluid” and there was a cooperative disposition. A source-faithful criticism preserves both propositions: documentary delay is not total refusal to cooperate.
Value, liabilities and trajectory require explanation
The administrator provisionally estimated EUR 16,752,575.32 in assets against EUR 9,469,157.93 in insolvency liabilities, with EUR 15,375,462.70 attributed to the real estate. This is not an adjudicated solvency finding: several entries and supporting records were unverified. It does require later reports and accounts to explain the trajectory of value, income and exit possibilities into liquidation.
Perimeter and future action
The report addresses 159 apartments, 29 premises and four pools after describing the sale of 12 of the 171 apartments initially acquired. It does not establish LPB ownership of all 262 properties in the mixed complex. It also announced rescission, recovery and possible criminal-action review; authority, implementation and outcome must be located before effectiveness or omission is asserted.
Official-request status. The 20-Aug-2026 agreement in Exp. Gub. 38/2026 answered and archived the TSJ supervisory lane, directing the requested index and testimony chains to article 234 LOPJ. An administrative appeal receipt and registry-processing confirmation are located; no superior decision is located. No response or certified production from the other two 15-Aug lanes is located.
From definitive texts to the 2021 result
| Period | Controlled source | Bounded reading |
|---|---|---|
| 2016–2017 · common phase and convenio | Definitive texts/opposition; 20-Jan and 22-Mar orders; no-haircut proposal, ordinary payment after one year and Aweswell guarantee; 19-Dec order. | The proposal was LPB's position. Liquidation opened after no convenio was accepted. |
| 2018 · plan and appeal | Plan, submissions, two 16-Apr orders, publicity, suspension and appeals. | Dation and separate EUR 400,000 sale with improvement; the court did not adopt Actúa figures as proved facts. |
| 2019–2020 · ceilings and non-validation | 23-Jul AP order; 24-Oct order; certificates/submissions; 12-May-2020 order. | AP partly allowed only the interest ceilings; the court refused to validate the consummated deed and restarted publicity, without finding a crime. |
| 2021 · licitation and approval | January orders/Edict; challenges; two 6-May orders; 12-May Providencia; Order 164/2021; two 15-Oct orders. | Order 164/2021 records third-party nonappearance/no bond and approves CAM; the complete recording/minute and implementation remain missing. |
Attributed allegation. Gil Marer alleges full criminal instrumentalisation of proceedings inside and outside Concurso 36/2012. It is retained as a party allegation / open investigative hypothesis, not a judicial finding or proved accusation against adverse parties or the judiciary.
Current controlled judicial spine
| Date | Node | Status | What can presently be said | What remains missing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19 Dec 2017 | Liquidation opening | Primary source | Opened LPB liquidation and required a plan and quarterly reports. | LPB's estate is not the whole mixed-ownership complex; the complete report run remains open. |
| 16 Apr 2018 | Plan approval | Primary source | Approved dation of listed properties and a separate EUR 400,000 line, with publication and better-offer controls. | Did not adopt the Actúa figures as proved or establish later implementation. |
| 12 May 2020 | Order MAT-005 | Primary source | Treated new demolition, access, inspection and expert requests as out of time in that motion. | Did not decide whether the events occurred or responsibility. |
| 25 Jan 2021 | Order | Primary source | Explains the arithmetic path from EUR 3,079,104.66 toward the EUR 3,182,000 mortgage ceiling within the improvement framework. | Underlying calculation/certificate and final legal classification of the amount. |
| 29 Jan 2021 | Edict | Primary source | Publishes quantified conditions for a third party, including EUR 13,168,082.02, EUR 400,000 and EUR 1,145,798.29. | Do not convert the package into CAM price or a single credit without title. |
| 8 Feb 2021 | Third-party offer · EUR 14.8m | Document located | A concrete competing alternative existed. | Filing, funds/capacity, treatment and exact disposition. |
| 24 Feb 2021 | Order 001 · inspection/preservation | Primary source | Replaced the reasoning but maintained denial of filing 7,299; could not identify ownership of interiors; treated common-area rubble as a removable aesthetic effect; did not attribute the start of common-area works to CAM; and rejected delay attributable to the court/AC. | Does not establish absence of damage throughout the estate or decide a later responsibility claim. |
| 24 Feb 2021 | Order 002 · extension | Distinct primary source | Granted one year and referred to nullity actions still “to be brought” against Bankia. | Does not prove filing, object, liability or success; “No-Swap” is only editorial filename wording. |
| 18 May 2021 | Order 164/2021 | Signed primary source | Definitively approves CAM's proposal after recording that the third-party bidder did not appear or lodge the bond. | Filed offer, authority/funds, appearance recording, service, finality and implementation. |
| 15 Oct 2021 | Presentation group · two analytical nodes | Signed primary sources | Two distinct signed orders are presented as one date group: one confirms the 18 May approval and describes improvement of offer; the other uses auction/adjudication terminology later clarified. | Underlying filings, service, finality and implementation. |
| 26 Jan 2022 | Two distinct clarification orders | Signed primary sources | One clarifies a better-offer licitation appearance, not an auction; the other completes the second branch without a new adjudication. | Individual responses, service/finality and exact relationship to the deed. |
| 22 Jan 2022 | Internal deed 457 notation | Notarial inconsistency | Preserved for reconciliation; not modelled as a separate judicial order. | Certified docket and any notarial explanation/correction. |
| 21 Feb 2022 | Public deed no. 457 | Primary source | Transfers the described mortgaged fincas and states EUR 13,168,082.02 as debt serving as consideration; requires communication to the court within five calendar days. | Legal bridge for the figure, court return, mandate, Registry and accounts. |
| 20 Apr 2022 | Registry implementation | Partial | The public reconstruction places registration in CAM's favour at this downstream node. | Finca-by-finca history, mandates, incorporated testimonios and cancellations. |
| Final | Accounts / surplus | Open | No complete primary accounting bridge has yet been recovered. | Ledger, bank, accounts, EUR 400k, costs, balance and final order. |
Three ledgers needed to close the chain
1. Order → Asset
For every finca: previous owner, inclusion or exclusion from LPB's estate, mortgage status, treatment in each order, deed 457, Registry result and any later transfer. Matkator and third-party property cannot be merged by narrative into LPB's estate.
2. Order → Money
Every figure must retain its legal function: credit, mortgage cap, competitive threshold, consideration, cash, cost or surplus. A repeated number does not automatically retain the same legal function.
3. Order → Implementation
For each authorization: what was ordered, conditions, who had to act, what proves compliance, when, which deed/mandate/Registry/bank/accounting entry implemented it, and what remained unresolved.
Document priority
- 18 May 2021 appearance recording/minute, complete offer, authority, funds and service/finality.
- Underlying filings, service and finality for both signed 15 October 2021 orders.
- Service/finality for both signed 26 January 2022 clarifications and notarial reconciliation of the 22 January notation.
- 2021-2022 testimonios, requests, service and notarial/Registry use.
- Post-deed court communication, mandate and Registry implementation.
- Complete accounting bridge, including EUR 400,000 and any surplus.
Evidential limit. A missing source does not prove non-existence or irregularity. An apparent contradiction may disappear once originals are recovered. This register is designed to make the chain testable, including evidence that weakens the working thesis.