Spain’s Supreme Court has struck down the national short-term rental register, but one question remains for the owners who paid to comply with it: can they get their money back?

According to property lawyer Alejandro Fuentes-Lojo, the answer is potentially yes, although recovering those costs may require navigating Spain’s administrative claims process.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision to annul the Single Rental Register introduced by Royal Decree 1312/2024, attention is now turning to the financial consequences for property owners who spent time and money obtaining the national registration number known as the NRUA.

In an interview with Spanish property portal Idealista, Alejandro Fuentes-Lojo of Fuentes Lojo Abogados argues that affected owners may have grounds to seek compensation because the registration system has been declared unlawful.

The Supreme Court ruled that the national register of short-term rentals duplicated existing regional tourist rental registers and encroached on powers that belong to Spain’s autonomous regions. While the legal implications of that ruling have already been widely discussed, the practical question for many owners is whether they can recover the costs they incurred complying with the system.

What costs could potentially be recovered?

According to Fuentes-Lojo, compensation claims could cover both direct expenses and, in some cases, lost income.

Direct losses may include Land Registry fees, gestoría charges, professional fees and other costs associated with obtaining the NRUA registration number.

Owners who can demonstrate that they lost rental income because they were unable to market their property while complying with the registration requirements may also be able to claim for lost profits (lucro cesante), although proving such losses is likely to be more complex.

As always with compensation claims against the administration, the theory may be simpler than the paperwork.

How would owners make a claim?

Fuentes-Lojo says the appropriate route is to file an administrative liability claim against the State, specifically through the Technical General Secretariat of the Ministry of Housing.

If the administration rejects the claim, or simply fails to respond within the legal timeframe, owners could then pursue the matter through the contentious-administrative courts.

Anyone considering a claim should keep records of all expenses related to obtaining the NRUA, including invoices, receipts and proof of payment.

Is there a deadline?

Yes. According to Fuentes-Lojo, affected owners have one year from publication of the Supreme Court ruling in the Official State Gazette (BOE) to submit a claim.

Missing that deadline could mean losing the right to seek compensation.

Should owners claim immediately?

Fuentes-Lojo suggests waiting briefly to see whether the Government establishes a specific mechanism for reimbursing affected owners.

If a streamlined refund process is introduced, it could spare owners the need to pursue individual administrative claims. For now, however, no such system has been announced.

In the meantime, owners who incurred costs obtaining the now-defunct NRUA may wish to gather documentation and seek legal advice on whether they have a viable claim. Whether the State ultimately refunds those costs remains to be seen, but the door appears to have been left open.