654 COMPETITION LAW IN TOURISM case of urban regulations as intense as those approved by the City Council of Barcelona (especially the Special Urban Plan ofTourist Accommodation PEUAT), which supposes a closing of the market. Even so, the Catalan Supreme Court and the Supreme Court consider that, even in cases of very intense limitations of certain uses, the Directive does not apply (the Supreme Court adds that even if the Directive were applicable, such limitations could be perfectly justified). However, we cannot see the question as settled for several reasons: there are contradictory sentences; while most understand that the content of each urban regulation must be analysed, the control of urban planning standards with the Directive is necessary because the TJEU has indicated so, on 30 January 2018: they must comply with the requirements of the Directive insofar as they regulate access6 to an activity and are aimed at people who intend to exercise them. This determines that we are, in most cases, faced with restrictions or limitations on the freedom to provide services. These limitations would only be valid if they complied with the requirements of Arts. 14 and 15 of the Directive: cannot be motivated by economic reasons; they cannot be discriminatory; they must be necessary for the protection of a general interest; and they must be proportional to the purpose they are intended to achieve. 2.3. Possibility of assigning the rooms of a VUT separately or completely The Court of Justice of Galicia considers that this possibility is expressly vetoed by Art. 5.e of Law 29/1994, on Urban Leases7. However, the issue does not seem so clear because Art. 5/e) is limited to determining the scope of application of the law and excludes contracts. On the other hand, the Basque and Andalusian autonomous norms clearly allow it. In this regard, the Court of Justice of the Canary Islands considers that the assignment of rooms is not contrary to the Law and that the prohibition of this possibility violates the free offer of services and free competition8. 2.4. Temporary limitations contained in decrees With regard to the establishment of a minimum period for the stays, the Supreme Court of Madrid has established that it is incompatible with the requirements 6 STJUE 30 January 2018. http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=198844&pageIndex=0 &doclang=ES. 7 Sentencing No. 48/2018, of 15 November, of the Hight Court of Justice of Galicia. 8 Sentencing No. 41/2017, of 21 March, of the Hight Court of Justice of the Canary Islands. Sentencing No. 85/2017, of 2 February, of the Hight Court of Justice of Castile and Leon.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==