Article 7 - Respect for private and family life
Article 34 - Social security and social assistance
Key facts of the case:
This is an appeal of unconstitutionality, filed by more than fifty members of the Confederal Parliamentary Group integrated by Unidas Podemos-En Compu Podem-En Marea in the Congress of Deputies (the Spanish National Parliament), regarding Law 5/2018, of 11 June, amending Law 1/2000, of 7 January, on civil proceedings, in relation to the illegal occupation of dwellings.
The appellants argued that the amendments made by the sole article of Law 5/2018 to the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter LEC) violate the right to the inviolability of the home (art. 18.2 of the Spanish Constitution, henceforth CE), the right to effective judicial protection (art. 24.1 CE) and the right to decent and adequate housing (art. 47 CE). They make it possible to carry out a forced eviction without a housing alternative and without allowing the judicial bodies to assess the specific circumstances concurrent in each case.
In this sense, according to the appellants, the regulation contained in the new section 4 of art. 150 LEC, added by section one of the sole article of Law 5/2018, does not satisfy the constitutional requirements referring to the rights to the inviolability of the home, effective judicial protection, defence, a process with all the guarantees and to housing. And they affirm that the reform introduced by the aforementioned sole article of Law 5/2018 does not comply with the minimum guarantees regarding forced evictions provided for in instruments issued by bodies dependent on the United Nations.
Key legal question:
Validity of the special and summary process for the immediate recovery of illegally occupied housing. There is no violation of material defencelessness provided for in article 24 CE. The occupant of the dwelling may oppose the plaintiff's claim if he proves that he has sufficient title to justify his possession. Nor is there any unconstitutionality in the possibility of the plaintiff to direct his claim in a generic manner against the unknown occupants of the dwelling.
Outcome of the case:
The appeal was dismissed and, consequently, the proposed legal amendment is given a free hand.
In its second paragraph, art. 441.1 bis LEC establishes that if the occupant does not provide within five days from the notification of the claim the title that justifies his possession situation, the judge will agree by order the immediate delivery of possession of the dwelling to the claimant. According to the appellants, this regulation would also infringe the right to effective judicial protection (art. 24.1 EC), as well as the right to a process with all the guarantees (art. 24.2 EC), since opposition to the claim can only be based on the existence of sufficient possessory title, without any possibility of alleging or providing other means of evidence, and the order is also irrecoverable. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in conjunction with the provisions of Article 10.2 EC, would therefore also be violated.
The foregoing is not incompatible with the duty of the Spanish State to adopt policies for the promotion of housing with a social accent, within the framework of the guiding principle of Article 47 EC (STC 152/1988, of 20 July). However, the protection of the right to decent and adequate housing (art. 47 EC) is that provided by art. 53.3 EC, since it is not a subjective right that can be demanded, but a programmatic constitutional mandate. In this sense, the order of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 16 July 2015, Case C-539/14, § 49, is mentioned, which categorically states that Article 34.3 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union does not guarantee the right to housing, but rather the right to social assistance and housing assistance within the framework of social policies based on Article 153 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Similarly, Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (like Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union) recognises the right of individuals to respect for their private and family life, as well as their domicile. […]
Similarly, Article 34(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union recognises the right to social assistance and housing assistance to ensure a decent existence for all those who do not have sufficient resources, in accordance with the procedures laid down by Union law and national laws and practices. The Court of Justice of the European Union has confirmed in its order of 16 July 2015, Case C-539/14, § 49, that this provision of the Charter does not guarantee the right to housing, but rather the "right to social assistance and housing assistance", within the framework of social policies based on Article 153 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
En su segundo párrafo, el art. 441.1 bis LEC establece que si el ocupante no aporta en el plazo de cinco días desde la notificación de la demanda el título que justifique su situación posesoria, el juez acordará por auto la inmediata entrega de la posesión de la vivienda al demandante. Según los recurrentes, esta regulación vulneraría igualmente el derecho a la tutela judicial efectiva (art. 24.1 CE), así como el derecho a un proceso con todas las garantías (art. 24.2 CE), pues la oposición a la demanda solo puede fundarse en la existencia de título posesorio suficiente, sin posibilidad alguna de alegar o de aportar otros medios de prueba, siendo además el auto irrecurrible. Resultarían por ello mismo vulnerados también el art. 6 del Convenio europeo de derechos humanos (CEDH) y el art. 47 de la Carta de derechos fundamentales de la Unión Europea, en relación con lo dispuesto en el art. 10.2 CE.
Lo anterior no es incompatible con el deber que tiene el Estado español de adoptar políticas de promoción de la vivienda con acento social, en el marco del principio rector del art. 47 CE (STC 152/1988, de 20 de julio). Ahora bien, la protección del derecho a disfrutar de una vivienda digna y adecuada (art. 47 CE) es la dispensada por el art. 53.3 CE, pues no se trata de un derecho subjetivo exigible, sino un mandato constitucional programático. En tal sentido se trae a colación el auto del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea de 16 de julio de 2015, asunto C-539/14, § 49, que afirma de forma tajante que el art. 34.3 de la Carta de derechos fundamentales de la Unión Europea no garantiza el derecho a la vivienda, sino el derecho a una ayuda social y a una ayuda de vivienda en el marco de las políticas sociales basadas en el art. 153 del Tratado de funcionamiento de la Unión Europea.
En sentido similar el art. 8 del Convenio europeo para la protección de los derechos humanos y de las libertades fundamentales (al igual que el art. 7 de la Carta de Derechos fundamentales de la Unión Europea) reconoce el derecho de las personas al respeto de su vida privada y familiar, así como de su domicilio. […]
En este mismo sentido, el art. 34.3 de la Carta de derechos fundamentales de la Unión Europea reconoce el derecho a una ayuda social y una ayuda de vivienda para garantizar una existencia digna a todos aquellos que no dispongan de recursos suficientes, según las modalidades establecidas por el Derecho de la Unión y las legislaciones y prácticas nacionales. El Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea ha corroborado en su auto de 16 de julio de 2015, asunto C-539/14, § 49, que esta disposición de la Carta no garantiza el derecho a la vivienda, sino el «derecho a una ayuda social y a una ayuda de vivienda», en el marco de las políticas sociales basadas en el art. 153 del Tratado de funcionamiento de la Unión Europea.
