{"id":706,"date":"2012-02-15T08:30:58","date_gmt":"2012-02-15T07:30:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/?p=706"},"modified":"2014-05-05T19:06:06","modified_gmt":"2014-05-05T18:06:06","slug":"san-jose-inversiones-left-out-of-the-bank-guarantee-fight","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/san-jose-inversiones-left-out-of-the-bank-guarantee-fight\/","title":{"rendered":"San Jose Inversiones Left Out of Bank Guarantee Fight"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>We did not foresee the Appeal Court in\u00a0Alicante overturning a judgement that left little room for interpretation.<\/p>\n<p>As expected, the Court of First Instance ruling forcing the all-purpose entity SGR- Sociedad de Garant\u00eda Rec\u00edproca de la Comunidad Valenciana (it comes across as a lender\/insurer\/guarantor, depending on who you ask) <strong>to refund fully a property purchaser of the failed Herrada del Tollo development<\/strong>, promoted by the developer Herrada del Tollo S.L., affiliate of the San Jos\u00e9 Inversiones Group, was ratified with ease.<\/p>\n<p lang=\"es\">\u00a0And so, what are the most practical conclusions that can be <strong>derived from the premises set forth by the initial ruling that has been confirmed by the Appeal Court in Alicante<\/strong>?<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li lang=\"es\">That a guarantee can be paid outside the receivership proceedings, whether by a\u00a0bank, insurer or an all-purpose lender, such as SGR, and thus prior\u00a0<strong>acceptance by the administrators is no prerequisite or prior condition for payment.<\/strong><\/li>\n<li lang=\"es\">That the <strong>collective guarantee cannot be capped, nor needs to be individualized<\/strong>, nor requires the off-plan property buyer signing any document to avail of its protection.<\/li>\n<li lang=\"es\">That <strong>timescales are, contrary to popular belief, pretty acceptable<\/strong> (The civil lawsuit was lodged with the Court of First Instance in June 2010 and the Appeal Court ruled in February 2012).<\/li>\n<li lang=\"es\">That SGR&#8217;s obstinacy will <strong>cost them dearly<\/strong>: <strong>judicial interest <\/strong>on the \u20ac60k deposit (since 2007, at an average of 4.5% per annum) and <strong>legal costs<\/strong> (\u20ac8,000 approximately).<\/li>\n<li lang=\"es\">That SGR, who also guaranteed other developments of the Santa Ana Group, such as <strong>El Pinet, will presumably no longer be able to oppose payment on the above grounds.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p lang=\"es\">Meanwhile, we have read that San Jos\u00e9 Inversiones has managed to emerge from the receivership proceedings and will resume its activities on projects that stalled as a result of the above process.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Documents<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u00a013-02-2012 &#8211;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/02\/2012-02-13-LAWBIRD-San-Jose-Inversiones-77-10-SENTENCIA.pdf\">Ruling in favour of Lawbird Client Enforcing Bank Guarantee in San Jose Inversiones Development<\/a> (PDF)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>We did not foresee the Appeal Court in\u00a0Alicante overturning a judgement that left little room for interpretation. As expected, the Court of First Instance ruling forcing the all-purpose entity SGR- Sociedad de Garant\u00eda Rec\u00edproca de la Comunidad Valenciana (it comes across as a lender\/insurer\/guarantor, depending on who you ask) to refund fully a property purchaser [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[85,84],"class_list":["post-706","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-litigation","tag-herrada-del-tollo-s-l","tag-san-jose-inversiones"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/706","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=706"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/706\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":709,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/706\/revisions\/709"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=706"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=706"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawbird.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=706"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}