Administrative claims

A company filed an administrative claim for damages in a urban planning matter . The City Council dismissed it, and the company turned to the administrative contentious route. The problem arose later when the judicial body rejected the appeal due to expiration, considering that the claim had been filed after the deadline . Everything revolved around an electronic notification that the company did not open.

The issue was very specific (but important), when you are notified of something by electronic means and you do not check it, when is it understood to be “notified” for the purposes of starting to count the deadline to act? The company argued that the notification should be understood as made later and, with that calculation, it would still be on time , it maintained that the deadline would extend until 15:00 on the “fifth” business day.

The Supreme Court (TS) does not agree with it. It establishes as a criterion that, if 3 business days pass since the electronic notification is available and the recipient does not access its content , the notification is understood to be practiced at the end of that third day business day. From there, the deadline to file the claim ends at 15:00 hours the following day (that is, the "fourth" day at 15:00). In this case, the company filed the claim on the fourth day, but after 15:00, so it was out of time.

The TS dismisses the appeal and confirms the inadmissibility due to filing outside the deadline . It also notes that this method of computation is compatible with effective judicial protection and seeks to provide legal certainty, and that no impediment was demonstrated that justified the late filing.

If you are affected by a sanctioning procedure, our professionals can provide you with appropriate advice and defend your interests