The foreseeable rejection in the Congress of Deputies of the decree containing the extraordinary extension of rental contracts (Junts plans to vote against it and the PNV has confirmed it will abstain), which the Government approved a month ago, opens up a scenario of legal uncertainty that pits tenants against homeowners. All consulted experts agree that a wave of complaints could begin (the UGT union speaks of an “avalanche”) from tenants who see their landlord unwilling to extend the terms of their current contract. The scenario, from a legal point of view, is unprecedented.
Read more Junts will bring down the investment consortium proposed by ERC in the first procedure
What does the decree include?
The royal decree-law extending rentals has allowed, during its weeks in force, tenants to request a mandatory contract extension for a maximum period of two years. Those tenants whose contracts expired during the time the rule was in force have been able to request such an extension, and homeowners have been obliged to extend the same lease conditions for two years.
What happens if the contract expires from tomorrow?
There lies the key to the legal entanglement. If the contract expires from tomorrow, once the decree is no longer in force, some interpret that the rule remains valid and, therefore, families or young people renting have the right to enjoy an extension of their contract under the same conditions. For this, the tenant had to have sent, during the decree’s period of validity, a burofax to their landlord requesting such an extension of the rental agreement.
The doctrine of the Constitutional Court establishes that “a negative result in the validation vote [as is expected to happen today] produces the immediate cessation of the effects of the decree-law and its disappearance from the legal system, but not the annulment of the effects produced during its validity”.
But there are also those who interpret that the effects of the law are no longer valid, once the decree has been repealed, and that, therefore, the landlords’ obligations have been extinguished. According to this interpretation, the owner of the rental property would not be obliged to extend the contract, even if they have received a burofax from their tenant requesting the measure.
Who will resolve this controversy?
The decree does not clarify what will happen if the rule lapses. Therefore, all experts agree that it will be the tenants who will have to sue landlords who, having received the burofax, do not extend the contracts. Some also venture that it will be homeowners who will have to resort to legal action to claim non-recognition of the contract extension.
The courts, therefore, will have to determine until what point the rental decree produces legal effects. This process can take months or years. In legal jargon, two terms are used to define the temporal effectiveness of legal acts or judgments: ex tunc (from then) implies retroactivity and, therefore, the effects apply from the origin of the act; or ex nunc (from now) means non-retroactivity or that the rule would be annulled at the moment it lapses in Congress.
Is there legal certainty for tenants and landlords?
No, at this moment there is no legal certainty for either party. There is all kinds of jurisprudence on conflicts related to housing and rentals. It is true that judges usually protect vulnerable tenants, but everything will depend on a judicial decision and the interpretation of the rule made by the judges.
Read more Airlines cut unprofitable flights in Spain due to the fuel crisis
What is the opinion of the Ministry of Social Rights and Consumer Affairs?
The criterion of the Ministry of Social Rights and Consumer Affairs, promoter of the rule, is that the royal decree-law is a rule approved with full legal effects and, therefore, its non-validation in Congress does not imply that these effects disappear. In their opinion, if tenants have carried out the appropriate procedures to request the rental extension and have acted in good faith, the extension is automatic. If, after this process, landlords have not accepted the extension, it is they, according to the department headed by Pablo Bustinduy, who are breaking the law. From here, legal processes would have to be entered into.
And what is the opinion of the Ministry of Housing?
Silence. Housing makes no statements. The First Vice-President and Minister of Economy, Carlos Cuerpo, did assure this Tuesday that a rule approved by the Council of Ministers is assumed by the entire Government, both by Sumar and by the PSOE.
What do the experts say?
There are opinions for all tastes, proof that the legal entanglement has no easy solution. Legal sources point out that an already non-existent rule cannot impose future obligations on the landlord. It is not a consummated act; the extension is not exhausted upon request, but rather has ongoing effects for two years. It generates a continuous obligation and cannot be supported by a non-existent rule. This is the main argument that owners who do not wish to comply with the requested extension can cling to.
Alejandro Inurrieta, economist and former president of the Public Rental Society, recalls that part of the tax deductions included in the Government’s omnibus decree, which also lapsed, have been maintained in the current income tax campaign. Therefore, he argues, if the tenant has sent a burofax to the landlord claiming the extension of their contract, they would legally be right. It is another matter if the landlord decides not to apply the extension and the conflict ends up in court, he concludes.
Why is it unexplored territory?
Since 2020, the central Government has approved eight extensions of rental contracts through royal decree-laws. The difference is that all of them have been validated in the Congress of Deputies. Therefore, there is no precedent for a rental extension that has lapsed. “We are entering unexplored territory,” points out a government economic official in a scenario where the rule has lapsed. During the current and past legislatures, the Government has lost several validations of royal decree-laws that have not had subsequent consequences in the legal system. An example was the decree to establish a tax on energy companies, which was repealed in January 2025 and extinguished the tax on the sector’s main companies.
Where can a tenant file a complaint?
The ideal is to reach a private agreement between landlord and tenant. However, this is not always possible. In anticipation of the aforementioned wave of claims in the courts, the UGT union has activated an advisory team for people residing in rental housing.
Read more The year starts with the loss of 170,000 employed and the addition of 231,000 unemployed
