Andorra Court Rejects Hotel Connection in Historic Core

The Superior Court of Justice has rejected appeals against the annulment of a Canillo parish ordinance that permitted an exceptional urban planning measure to connect two hotels in El Tarter's historic core.

In its 3 February 2026 ruling, the court's administrative chamber upheld a lower court decision from the Tribunal de Batlles, which had invalidated both the parish ordinance and the Technical Urban Planning Commission's approval. The appeals came from Canillo parish council, the Andorran government, and the property owners. The project aimed to link the Cal Motxo hotel and Chalet Casalé internally through a pedestrian connection featuring stairs and a multi-segment ramp to bridge their differing levels. It also involved expanding one building, with exterior finishes including stone facades, a vegetated roof, black-painted iron railings, and wooden windows to blend with the surroundings.

Back in January 2024, Canillo parish received the application for this volumetric planning ordinance. Proponents claimed it would boost accessibility—particularly for those with reduced mobility—enhance architectural harmony in the protected zone, aid tourism operations in the catalogued buildings, and minimise construction impact.

The court dismissed these arguments, finding no sufficient evidence of general public interest or public utility required to deviate from the standard continuous party-wall system in historic cores. The judges noted the promoters' memorandum emphasised only private improvements in internal hotel communications, lacking proof of broader benefits. Accessibility gains were deemed exclusive to hotel guests, not the public, with no enhancements to shared spaces or collective needs.

The ruling rejected claims that tourism's strategic role automatically created public utility, viewing the advantages as primarily private and tied to business profitability. It also saw no link between the connection and preserving the buildings' heritage value, stressing that their catalogued status warranted even stricter scrutiny for exceptions under regulations like the POUP. Administrative bodies must provide reasoned justification, not rely on discretion alone.

The decision is final, enforceable, and imposes no costs on any party, closing the legal dispute initiated by a third-party challenge.