Ads: Answers to your questions below in bold orange :
Maybe it’s worth reflecting on a thread back in 2016 when the matter of “reckless litigation” was discussed.
https://www.eyeonspain.com/forums/posts-long-21916p1ondak-.htm
With this in mind Maria....
On one of the community threads https://www.eyeonspain.com/community-forum/35266/lawyers-fees.aspx a poster recently identified that after waiting a couple of YEARS since submission of a Bank’s appeal against costs, it has just been rejected by the SC.
Would you know if this was due to non admission, as you also identified back in April 2016 that “Supreme Court does not issue doctrine on Costs as this matter is regulated by a Procedural Act.” I would need to see the SC Inadmission Judicial Decree. There is some debate on " doubts of facts and rights" at Appeal level, it is possible that this matter has come to the Supreme Court.
This begs the question, to your knowledge, are piecemeal actions submitted by the Banks to the SC being subsequently DENIED admission? Yes, many. They are being rejected by the SC stating that Case Law in clear since 2015 and there is no reasons for a change.
In your experience, are questionable appeals to the SC now proving of growing concern? Not, really. Supreme Court is stating once and again that Doctrine cannot be changed.
Do you consider some of these appeals to the SC as reckless litigation? And more importantly are Banks being made fully accountable, to act as fair and appropriate disincentive? Yes, I think they are.
Where highly questionable appeals exist, is there any opportunity to swiftly highlight this after a Banks appeal submission to the SC, in order to speed up the process, or does the system leave little option but for the innocent purchaser to remain exposed to MAJOR continuing delays of this order?
Civil Procedure Act: Article 485 Admission and transfer to the other parties
Once the cassation appeal has been admitted, the Court Clerk will send the filing document, with its attached documents, to the party or parties appealed, so that they formalize their opposition in writing within a period of twenty days and state whether they consider it necessary to hold a hearing. .
In the notice of opposition, the grounds for inadmissibility of the appeal that are considered existing and that have not already been rejected by the Court may also be alleged.
Once a final ruling has been achieved, how long for instance does it take to actually retrieve awarded costs and interest ( best and worse cases). Between 9 and 12 months. Are these now being increasingly contested by the Banks? At present there are more appeals by banks due to different reasons
(1) case law of depositers banks and of guarantoors have been somehow mixed up and misunderstood by some judges and Appeal Courts.
(2) Supreme Court has exceptioned responsibility --for both liabilities of depositers and guarantoors and without taking into accountg substance differences between one and another liability---, in cases where payments were made in a different way/ account to what it was agreed in contracts and in a way that left banks/insurers without control possibilities.
(3) Banks are arguing more and more the investor profile of the buyer, Appeals Courts are being quite reasonable and fair when addressing this matter
(4) Banks are arguing more and more " unloyal/delayed claim", samehow Appeals Courts are being quite reasonable and fair when addressing this matter
(5) Banks are also trying to avoid imposition of legal costs by arguing " doubts of facts or rights", which, again, is being well solved by Appeal Courts.
So I would say that there is a more active, varied, defense by Banks but that they have Case Law against them in a big and meaningful extent.