Skip to content 
This Cases section was prepared based on an analysis of publications by Spanish lawyers and law firms throughout 2026, across five key practice areas of the firm. The cases are illustrative and reflect typical situations rather than descriptions of specific client matters.
Case 1 · Immigration Law
Moving from temporary protection to residency under the SEM 2/2026 instruction
Practice area: Immigration law
Situation. A client holding temporary protection, set to expire on March 4, 2027, asked whether it was possible to move to another type of residency without leaving Spain and without waiting for the protection to end.
The challenge. The SEM 2/2026 instruction allows temporary protection holders to move to other types of stay or residency, provided the chosen procedure allows filing from within Spain — but it doesn’t guarantee an automatic transition and requires precisely selecting the right track (employment, social rootedness/arraigo, family reunification, etc.) for the client’s specific circumstances.
What we did. We reviewed the client’s employment history, family situation, and length of residence in Spain, selected the optimal transition track, prepared the full document package, and filed the application from within the country without interrupting the client’s legal status.
Outcome. The client maintained continuous legal stay in Spain and secured a residency basis independent of the temporary protection’s expiration date.
Case 2 · Spanish Citizenship
A stalled file and administrative silence (silencio administrativo)
Practice area: Citizenship / naturalization
Situation. A client applied for Spanish citizenship by residency. More than 12 months after receiving a request to correct deficiencies (requerimiento de subsanación) and responding within the deadline, no decision had been issued.
The challenge. Once a year has passed since filing without a decision, so-called “administrative silence” (silencio administrativo) sets in — formally treated as a denial, but in practice opening the door to a contentious-administrative appeal (recurso contencioso-administrativo) to force a ruling. The 2026 judicial trend clearly favors applicants: courts increasingly recognize that unjustified delay violates the right to good administration.
What we did. We prepared and filed a contentious-administrative appeal, demonstrating that all requested deficiencies had been corrected on time and that the requirements had been fully met.
Outcome. The case was accelerated through the courts — consistent with the broader trend, where the vast majority of such appeals result in the citizenship being granted before a final judgment is even issued.
Case 3 · Real Estate
Breach of an arras (deposit) contract and the Supreme Court’s position (STS 178/2026)
Practice area: Real estate / civil law
Situation. A client had paid a deposit (arras) toward a property purchase. The seller later made clear he had no intention of completing the sale, without formally declaring withdrawal from the contract.
The challenge. The type of deposit (confirmatory, penal, or forfeitable) determines the consequences of breach — ranging from demanding specific performance of the contract to double reimbursement of the deposit. The key question was whether the seller’s evasive conduct could be treated as an effective withdrawal, even without an explicit statement to that effect.
What we did. Relying on Spain’s Supreme Court ruling (Sentencia 178/2026 of February 9, Civil Chamber), which held that conduct unequivocally revealing a party’s unwillingness to perform can function as a withdrawal under Article 1454 of the Civil Code, we built the client’s legal position and sent a notarial demand followed by a court claim.
Outcome. The client secured recognition of the seller’s conduct as an effective withdrawal and recovered the compensation provided for breach cases — without having to wait years for the other party to formally declare withdrawal.
Case 4 · Tax Law
Digital nomad, self-employment, and retroactive residency
Practice area: Tax law
Situation. A client relocated to Spain in August on a digital nomad visa and immediately registered as autónomo (self-employed) to work with Spanish and foreign clients.
The challenge. Registering as autónomo on its own creates a centre of economic interests in Spain, regardless of the number of days actually spent there — meaning the tax authority was entitled to treat the client as a full-year 2026 resident, including income earned before the move.
What we did. We analyzed the client’s income structure across the full year, prepared documentary support for the actual date the centre of interests shifted to Spain, and, in parallel, planned a business-registration timeline for a family member relocating later that avoided the same risk.
Outcome. The client obtained a clear, defensible basis for the start date of tax residency, while the family member had a pre-planned relocation timeline with no risk of retroactive residency.
Case 5 · Family Law
Family in Spain — “default” residency for a spouse based abroad
Practice area: Family and tax law
Situation. A client ran his business abroad and spent fewer than 183 days a year in Spain, believing tax residency didn’t apply to him. His wife and minor child lived permanently in Barcelona.
The challenge. A spouse and child permanently residing in Spain creates a presumption of residency for the client himself too, regardless of how many days he personally spends in the country, unless proven otherwise.
What we did. We assembled documentation supporting the client’s separate centre of vital interests abroad (permanent home, tax residency in another jurisdiction, main business), and reviewed the applicable double taxation treaty between Spain and the country where he runs his business.
Outcome. The presumption of residency was successfully rebutted with documentary evidence, allowing the client to retain his prior tax status without affecting his family’s residency situation in Spain.
