Laura Garriga

Lawyer

Laura Garriga Moyano graduated in law from the University of Barcelona, where she studied between 1991 and 1996, and went on to complete her training with the Máster en Abogacía at the Instituto Superior de Derecho y Economía (ISDE) in 1997. That same year she was admitted to the Barcelona Bar Association. She began her professional career at a Barcelona law firm, where for five years she worked in procedural law, civil law and commercial law. In 2002 she joined Alburquerque Abogados and has been a partner in the firm since 2005.

Her practice is concentrated in civil and commercial law, with extensive experience both in advisory work and in resolving disputes. She advises on contractual, corporate and regulatory matters and acts on real estate transactions and commercial deals. She also has particular experience in the sale and purchase of pharmacies and in insurance law.

A significant part of her work is in civil litigation, defending the interests of individuals and companies in proceedings concerning, among other matters, construction, landlord and tenant, condominium law and civil liability. Her litigation experience covers the various instances and appeals, including cassation appeals before the Supreme Court and the “Tribunales Superiores de Justicia”, the high courts of the autonomous regions.

Practice areas

Publications

Landlord and tenant

The 2026 case-law earthquake over the Single Register of Short-Term Rentals

The judgments of the “Tribunal Supremo” —the Spanish Supreme Court— of May and June 2026 have annulled the essential elements of the “Registro Único de Arrendamientos de corta duración” —the Single Register of Short-Term Rentals— procedure provided for in Royal Decree 1312/2024, deactivating compulsory registration in the property and movable-assets registries as a condition for offering short-term lets. After this “case-law earthquake”, the “Ventanilla Única Digital de Arrendamientos” —the Digital Single Window for Rentals— and the obligations to transmit data for statistical and coordination purposes remain in place, but the civil‑administrative registration core disappears. This paper analyses what is left of the Single Register after the judgments and how it connects with the Catalan model, where strong administrative and community-level regulation of tourist rentals was already in place.

Inheritance, dependency and undue influence. Who may benefit under a will after Catalan Law 13/2026

Law 13/2026 introduces a far-reaching reform of the rules on disqualification from inheriting under the “Código Civil de Cataluña”, the Catalan Civil Code, amending article 412‑5 so as to address expressly the position of those who have provided formalised support of a representative nature and to strengthen the safeguards applying to carers, care homes and providers of care services who are favoured by the deceased. This reform lies at the confluence of the new model of support for the exercise of legal capacity, protection against undue influence and the need to preserve the testamentary freedom of elderly or dependent persons. For private practice, the impact is immediate in wills made by persons who live in care homes, receive private care or have assistants, and it opens up a field of potential litigation concerning conflicts of interest, the rendering of accounts and challenges brought by forced heirs.

Licences for tourist-use dwellings in Catalonia after STC 64/2025

Catalan Decree-Law 3/2023 made the operation of tourist-use dwellings in 262 municipalities subject to prior planning permission, with licences valid for five years and renewable and a statutory ceiling of ten tourist-use dwellings for every one hundred inhabitants. STC 64/2025 of 13 March, a judgment of the Spanish Constitutional Court, dismissed the constitutional challenge in its entirety and held that these restrictions delimit the social function of property rather than amounting to an expropriatory deprivation. This new paradigm raises with particular force the question of whether there is a vested right to operate a dwelling as tourist accommodation, and requires the condominium regime, planning law and the right to property in Catalonia to be read together.

Making a will with support: the new testamentary capacity in Catalonia following Law 13/2026

The “Ley 13/2026, de 3 de agosto” —Law 13/2026 of 3 August— is a far-reaching reform of Book IV of the “Código Civil de Cataluña”, the Catalan Civil Code, on the law of succession, and is due to come into force on 4 February 2027. The reform turns on the redefinition of testamentary capacity around natural capacity at the time of execution, the adaptation of the notary's assessment of capacity to a support-based model and the specific regulation of wills made by persons with sensory disabilities. It forms part of the wider process of bringing Catalan civil law into line with the new paradigm of disability, centred on autonomy, support and accessibility, and it raises significant questions as to the distinction between natural capacity and legal capacity, the involvement of medical experts, subsequent challenges to the will, undue influence and notarial liability.

Rent control in 2026: how the maximum rent is actually determined in Catalonia's stressed market areas

The combined application of Law 12/2023, the “Ley de Arrendamientos Urbanos” —the LAU, Spain's urban tenancies act— and Catalan housing legislation has produced in Catalonia a complex system for determining the initial rent in areas of stressed residential market. The maximum rent depends on whether or not there was a previous contract in the last five years, on whether the landlord is a “gran tenedor” —a large-scale landlord—, on the state reference price index and on the exceptions for improvement works or long-term contracts. This paper sets out, from a practical standpoint, how the initial rent is determined in Catalonia in 2026, addressing situations such as contracts with no previous tenancy, the passing on of expenses, improvement works, dwellings previously let by rooms and changes in floor area or conditions.

Unfinished works, liability intact: the architect's liability before acceptance of the works following STS 643/2026

Judgment 643/2026 of 28 April of the “Tribunal Supremo” —Spain's Supreme Court— deals with a case concerning a single-family house whose construction was left unfinished and which was never formally accepted in accordance with article 6 of the “Ley de Ordenación de la Edificación”, the LOE, Spain's building legislation. Despite this, the architect had made errors in the design and in the professional supervision of the works and had signed a “certificado final de obra”, a final works certificate, which did not correspond to reality. The Supreme Court rejects the argument that the absence of completion and acceptance may serve the architect as a means of escaping liability, and stresses that the LOE governs the building process and the professional obligations arising in the course of it. The decision makes it possible to examine acceptance of the works, the final certificate, errors of design and supervision, the difference between LOE liability and contractual liability and the principle that no one may benefit from their own breach, with particular interest in the Catalan context.

IRAV, the reference price index and the previous rent: three distinct concepts for calculating rent in Catalonia

Since January 2025 two instruments have coexisted in Spanish law which bear on the price of rented housing and which are frequently confused in practice: the reference index for the annual updating of the rent, drawn up by the “Instituto Nacional de Estadística” (INE), Spain's national statistics institute, and the state system of reference price indices used to set the maximum initial rent in stressed residential market areas. To these is added, in Catalonia, the reference to the previous rent of the last five years as a specific limit in stressed market areas. This paper draws a conceptual distinction between the annual updating index, the state reference price index and the previous rent, and analyses how the three interact in practice in the determination of rent in Catalonia.

Waiting periods and surprising clauses in life insurance: how far art. 3 LCS reaches after Supreme Court Judgment 531/2026

Judgment 531/2026 of 9 April of the “Tribunal Supremo” —Spain's Supreme Court, hence STS— classifies as a clause limiting the rights of the insured a stipulation imposing a 90-day waiting period for myocardial infarction cover under a life insurance policy, holding it to be a surprising clause in relation to a cover expressly taken out. Being a limiting clause, it must satisfy the requirements of article 3 of the “Ley de Contrato de Seguro”, Spain's Insurance Contract Act or LCS: special highlighting and specific acceptance in writing. The decision offers an apt occasion to review the boundary between clauses defining the risk, limiting clauses and prejudicial clauses, one of the main focal points of litigation in the insurance field.

The new “administrative policing” of rent in Catalonia: penalties, advertising, evidence and inspection after Decree‑Laws 1/2025 and 3/2026

Since 2025 Catalonia has moved from an essentially civil control of rent to a system of intense administrative enforcement over the rental market. Decree‑Laws 1/2025 and 3/2026 strengthen the penalty regime of Law 18/2007 and Law 13/1996, setting out obligations of information, advertising, documentation and deposit, as well as a register of large-scale landlords. This paper examines how overcharging is proved and penalised, the relationship between the administrative penalty and restitution to the tenant, and the evidential value of the data held by INCASÒL, the Catalan land institute.

Can the tax authorities use a mortgage valuation to raise the tax value of a property?

The use by the tax authorities of the mortgage valuation incorporated into the deed in order to raise the tax value of a property has been the subject of intense debate in academic commentary and in the case law. The judgments of the Third Chamber of the “Tribunal Supremo”, Spain's Supreme Court, of 23 and 27 February 2026, in line with the Chamber's official case‑law report for the 2025–2026 two‑year period, confirm that, in cases where a “comprobación de valores” —a review of declared values— is available, the tax authorities may have recourse to the mortgage valuation figure where there is a material difference from the value declared, without any need to establish fraud or concealment beforehand. That valuation does not, however, become an irrebuttable presumption: the taxpayer may contest it by means of expert evidence and, where appropriate, through the “tasación pericial contradictoria”, the adversarial expert valuation provided for in the “Ley General Tributaria”, Spain's General Tax Act —the LGT—. This mechanism must be clearly distinguished from the cadastral reference value, which operates as a direct taxable base in the “Impuesto sobre Transmisiones Patrimoniales y Actos Jurídicos Documentados”, Spain's transfer tax and stamp duty, and in the “Impuesto sobre Sucesiones y Donaciones”, its inheritance and gift tax.

Holograph wills and inheritance tax: recording the will in the notarial protocol does not stop the tax time limit

The “testamento ológrafo” —the holograph will— is a classic institution of civil law which, in order to take full effect, requires a subsequent procedure of authentication and recording in the notarial protocol. In practice, many heirs have understood that this procedure “suspends” or postpones the moment at which the obligation to declare and pay the “Impuesto sobre Sucesiones y Donaciones”, Spain's inheritance and gift tax, arises. The judgment of the Third Chamber of the “Tribunal Supremo”, Spain's Supreme Court, of 27 January 2026, Second Section, cassation appeal 1845/2024, clearly corrects that perception: where the recording of a holograph will is dealt with as non-contentious proceedings and does not become contentious, the tax accrues on the death of the deceased and the subsequent recording does not of itself postpone the start of the six-month period for filing the self-assessment. The decision has significant practical consequences in terms of surcharges, late-payment interest and limitation, and makes it necessary to distinguish between the mere handling of a non-contentious matter before a notary or a court and a genuine judicial dispute with suspensive effect on the time limits.

Suspension of possession claims on grounds of vulnerability until 31 December 2026: an exceptional measure that has become structural

Royal Decree‑Law 16/2025 has once again extended, until 31 December 2026, the extraordinary suspension of certain possession and eviction proceedings on grounds of housing vulnerability, while at the same time maintaining a compensation scheme for landlords and owners, applications for which may be made until 31 January 2027. What began as an exceptional measure linked to the health and economic crisis has become a structural element of the housing protection system, with profound implications for effective judicial protection, for the social function of property and for the balance between the right to housing and owners' right to recover possession. This article critically examines six years of extraordinary suspension of evictions, analysing how vulnerability is defined, the impact on possession proceedings and the effectiveness of the compensation scheme.

Mandatory social rent in Catalonia after SSTC 120/2024 and 25/2025 and STS 1086/2025

The Catalan mandatory social rent regime has undergone a far-reaching transformation following judgments 120/2024 and 25/2025 of the “Tribunal Constitucional”, Spain's Constitutional Court, and judgment 1086/2025 of the “Tribunal Supremo”, Spain's Supreme Court. The Constitutional Court has annulled various elements of the Catalan reforms that turned the offer of social rent into a procedural precondition, on the ground that they encroached on the State's competences over procedural matters and civil legislation, while the Supreme Court has held that art. 5.2 of Catalan Law 24/2015 refers to mortgage enforcement and to possession claims for non-payment, but not to possession claims based on expiry of the contractual term. The result is a model in which the administrative obligation to offer social rent survives in certain situations of vulnerability, but its configuration as a procedural requirement fades away and the need to distinguish between the administrative obligation, the penalty regime and the effects on possession proceedings is reinforced.