PDPor DerechoInsolvency 36/2012 · Registry / ob rem

26 JUNE 2018 → 28 NOVEMBER → 4 JANUARY 2019 → 24 OCTOBER 2019

Operative partial stay; separate transaction without prior judicial authorisation; later non-convalidation.

That is the central distinction in the controlled record. The 26 June order stayed only realisation of the listed mortgaged properties and left liquidation of other assets to continue. It did not amend the Plan or prospectively authorise the separate 28 November deed. The signed 24 October 2019 order described the partial approach as erroneous against the unitary architecture, set aside the 12 December LAJ direction and refused to convalidate the deed.

Provisional legal answer. The 26 June order used a then-available statutory stay mechanism and was operative on its wording; no present source establishes that it was void. Its partial application could be erroneous and inconsistent with the Plan without automatically being unlawful or criminal. The continuation clause gives the Insolvency Administrator a literal defence, but did not provide prior judicial authorisation, amend the Plan or remove ob rem links. The 24 October order is the controlling judicial correction, while leaving a separate proof question: how title, money, possession, accounting and Registry effects were—or were not—reversed.

Reverse-engineering the approved and implemented multitrack

Plan and offer: unitary architecture

The Administrator's Plan and the later ruling describe one acquisition architecture: apartment dation and a €400,000 locals/pools sale within the same economic design.

26 June 2018: narrow stay

LPB requested a broader stop. The Court stayed only realisation of the listed mortgaged properties and directed that liquidation of the remaining estate continue.

28 November: deed before authorisation

The unlinking/sale deed for properties 8,508–8,536, 8,653 and 8,654 was executed fourteen days before the 12 December LAJ direction. A later LAJ act could not be prior judicial authorisation for a completed transaction.

28 December–9 January: notice, delivery and response

Cuatrecasas warned the Registry with ten documents. The burofax was admitted on 3 January and delivered to the Registry on 4 January 2019 at 11:58. On 9 January there was a follow-up, a reasoned Registrar response and a qualification identifying an ob rem obstacle for 8,536, 8,653 and 8,654.

20 March–24 October 2019: attempted and refused convalidation

The Administrator requested convalidation of the already executed deed. The 24 October order found no prior judicial authority, set aside the 12 December direction and refused convalidation.

2021–2022: same perimeter, another legal life

The locals/pools perimeter was tendered again in 2021 and entered the 2022 title implementation. The reconciliation between non-convalidation, works/condition, possession, €400,000, accounting and Registry remains open.

Boundary: “not convalidated” does not automatically mean every civil, Registry, possessory or accounting effect disappeared. The act reversing, replacing or accounting for each effect must be located.

Registry notice: events now registered

DateControlled eventProof / limit
28 Dec 2018Cuatrecasas sent a direct notice and ten PDFs.Protective act and knowledge; not proof of a complete remedy.
3 Jan 2019Burofax admitted.Postal custody, not yet delivery.
4 Jan 2019 · 11:58Delivery to the Property Registrar.Demonstrable institutional receipt; not automatic personal reading of every enclosure.
8 Jan 2019Status call names “Don Antonio” as an internal contact.Identity/role unresolved; do not conflate him with Antonio Cogolludo or the Registrar.
9 Jan 2019Follow-up sent Fiscalía material.Transmission of allegations, not proof of their truth.
9 Jan 2019Francisco Javier Nieto González confirmed staff had passed him the email and written documents.Article 6 standing and Article 18 qualification-scope response; counterevidence to “silence” or “collaboration.”
9 Jan 2019Qualification: ob rem obstacle and partial suspension for 8,536, 8,653 and 8,654.Controlled copy; certified property-by-property bridge remains open.
March 2019Later report: 28 properties registered / 3 not registered.Reported result; not a substitute for historical certifications.

The ten attachments and their SHA-256 hashes are registered in the machine-readable supplement. Two anomalies are preserved: the CAM Annex II copy includes 8,579 and omits 8,519, and the contemporaneous “four properties” reference does not cleanly match the three later affected by the obstacle.

Actor-specific reading, without transferring culpability

Acosta Matos / CAM and Insolvency Administrator

The finite hypothesis is that the residual wording of the partial order was used to complete a separate transaction inconsistent with the unitary architecture and lacking prior authority. The strongest defence is the express direction to continue other assets. The answer is the 24 October finding, chronology, ob rem qualification and incomplete economic/Registry bridge. Knowledge, purpose, benefit and causal contribution remain person- and act-specific.

Magistrate-Judge

For Alberto López Villarrubia, Magistrate-Judge of the then Commercial Court No. 1 of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, the alleged error must be tied to specified decisions. The 24 October corrective order is mandatory counterevidence: it does not prove knowing injustice in June, but does not alone explain later material implementation.

Tías Property Registry

Delivery and institutional knowledge are established, as are a reasoned response and a real registration obstacle. The present record does not support saying that the Registry “ignored” the warning or collaborated in the transaction. What remains is documentary: presented title, standing, qualification, notices, entries and rectification.

Cuatrecasas / later fee enforcement

The notice, delivery and follow-up are protective acts and rule out total abandonment. They also fix a knowledge benchmark for engagement scope, advice, urgency, judicial/Registry action, qualification response, restitution/accounting, warnings, limitation and file handover. The La Laguna fee-enforcement lane is separate: title, debt, notes/assignment, exact representation to the judge, reliance, ruling and loss.

Procedural fraud, “insolvency fraud” and judicial prevarication: proof gates

Procedural fraud

An insolvency irregularity is not enough. A specific deception/manipulation, judicial recipient, actual error, economically prejudicial decision and causation must be identified. Because the deed predates the LAJ direction, that direction could not have induced execution of the completed deed. Investigation must locate another causal chain—such as a later convalidation or implementation representation—and test it against the partial-order defence.

“Insolvency fraud”

The phrase is retained only as party shorthand for alleged fraud within or around the insolvency. It is not a finding and does not replace proof of a defined offence, actor, act, knowledge, benefit, loss and causation.

Judicial prevarication

Error, inconsistency or an adverse ruling is insufficient. A specified ruling, objective injustice at the criminal threshold, knowledge—or where applicable gross negligence/inexcusable ignorance—and consequence are required. The 2019 correction weighs as an alternative explanation and counterevidence.

Professional negligence / enforcement

Engagement, duty, breach, causation and loss must be proved. A later criminal fee theory additionally needs the exact judicial deception and effect. This record does not establish that Cuatrecasas shared a plan with CAM, the Administrator or the judge.

Official texts: Insolvency Act 22/2003 (Articles 148, 188 and then 197.6), Civil Procedure Act (Article 206), Mortgage Act (Articles 6 and 18) and Criminal Code (Articles 250.1.7, 446 and 447). Informational analysis, not legal advice.

Evidence that would change the result

  1. Native/certified 28 November deed and money/bank/accounting trail.
  2. Original 12 December LAJ direction and challenge/service.
  3. Complete AC filing 1760/2019.
  4. Journal and historical certifications for all 31 properties.
  5. Cancellation, restitution, possession and accounting after 24 October.
  6. 2021 bidder disclosures and the 2022 title bridge.
  7. Engagements, advice, time, invoices, warnings, handover and complete fee-enforcement file.
Court recordInsolvency AdministratorMagistrate-JudgeCuatrecasasDP 748 / civil actionRIC / private equity

Updated 31 August 2026. Allegations attributed; counterevidence preserved; open to documentary correction and right of reply.