Andorra Court Rules Terres del Solà Plot Not Consolidated Urban Land, Blocks Development

The Superior Court of Andorra has ruled that the Terres del Solà de l’Estany plot in Escaldes-Engordany does not qualify as consolidated urban land, upholding a Batllia decision and dismissing an appeal by the property owners, the heirs of Joan Tomàs from casa Xirro. The 5 March 2026 judgment partially annuls the parish's 2007 and 2018 urban planning schemes (POUP) for this specific site near Engolasters lake, preventing development without completing required infrastructure.

The case originated from a 2022 lesivity action by Escaldes-Engordany parish authorities, including cònsols Rosa Gili and Quim Dolsa, who sought to void the entire administrative file dating back to 1992. Their broader claims challenged land boundaries between private and public areas, a land swap, and the plot's urban classification. The Batllia initially rejected most demands, citing risks to legal certainty after decades, but the Superior Court refined the scope through multiple reviews.

It distinguished time-barred issues like boundaries and the swap, which required separate procedures, from the urban status debate. Only the latter succeeded: consolidated urban land under article 25 of the General Law on Territorial Planning and Urbanism (LGOTU) demands operational basics such as drinking water, sewage, lighting, stormwater drainage, and adequate access. An expert architectural report confirmed the urbanisation is roughly 40% complete, heavily degraded with overgrowth, no buildings, and zero functioning services—only degraded kerbs and paths exist.

Owners argued a 2018 LGOTU amendment (disposition addicional segona and article 83) allowed flexibility for pre-approved, incomplete sites, akin to cases like Can Noguer. The court rejected this, stating such provisions cover only technical tweaks like road widths or slopes in existing, built areas—not absent essentials. It emphasised physical reality over formal plans, noting the amendment's late addition made owners' logic illogical: the site couldn't qualify initially and shouldn't retroactively.

The ruling bars treating the plot as ready for building, closing a protracted dispute that narrowed from comprehensive annulment to this targeted outcome.