The First Section of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber made this decision on April 15, 2026, ratifying the inadmissibility of the appeal lodged by the Council. This appeal sought to overturn a previous ruling by the High Court of Justice of Madrid.
The original sentence, issued in September 2024, had partially upheld an appeal against the Municipal Plenary's agreement of September 13, 2021. This agreement modified the 2018 ordinance and annulled several provisions linked to the delimitation and operation of low emission zones.
The primary reason for the annulment focused on the inadequacy of the economic impact report. The court found that the consequences of traffic restrictions were not properly assessed, nor was a complete balance of benefits and costs performed, in addition to failing to analyze less restrictive alternatives.
Additionally, the court also noted deficiencies in the environmental impact report during the drafting process of the regulation.
“"The appeal is based on a discrepancy with the assessment made by the TSJM, focused on factual and evidentiary matters, which falls outside the scope of a cassation appeal."
The City Council argued that its appeal should be admitted due to the existence of cassational interest, as a general provision had been partially annulled. However, the Supreme Court reiterated that this argument alone is insufficient and that such interest must be additionally justified in each specific case. This ruling will not affect fines, as the City Council approved a new ordinance a month ago, replacing the annulled one.
