The nullity of Urban Planning: a perspective from the experience of the Supreme Court

Abstract

This article examines the crisis derived from the nullity of urban planning from the experience of the Supreme Court. It begins analyzing how this legal crisis is determined by the nature of regulatory norms of the Urban Masterplans and, by a derivation tied to it: that the illegality of the aforementioned regulatory norms cannot have another consequence than the full nullity of of the Masterplans. Some of the nullity causes can be classified as material (non-existent or deficient environmental evaluation, absence of water resources, mandatory reports, etc.) formal (such as defects in the public audience). Taking into account the need to apply the principle of proportionality in the urban field, the paper reminds how many experts from various fields have considered the legal consequence of the nullity of planning to be disproportionate. Finally, some jurisprudential advances where nullity is modulated are presented, such as the General Masterplan of Yaiza (Lanzarote), the Special Plan for Urban Control of Madrid or the General Masterplan of El Puerto de Santa María (Cádiz).