A Madrid court has stopped the eviction of Alejandro Ibáñez, 81, from his municipal flat. The city council is weighing an appeal. The case highlights tensions over housing rights and building safety in the capital.
The Madrid City Council is weighing a legal appeal after a court blocked the eviction of Alejandro Ibáñez, an 81-year-old resident who has refused to leave his municipal apartment in La Latina. The court's decision, issued on July 2, found that the city failed to provide sufficient technical justification for suspending Ibáñez's right to remain in his home during planned renovations. This marks the first significant legal setback for the council in its efforts to clear the building for a major rehabilitation project.
Mayor José Luis Martínez-Almeida confirmed on Tuesday that the city is reviewing its options following the ruling. He argued that the building faces structural and safety issues, and noted that two other residents were previously evicted with court approval based on the same documentation. The mayor also stated that tenants who temporarily vacate would be allowed to return under the same rental terms and without losing any rights.
The dispute began in June 2024, when the city notified 61 elderly residents of the San Francisco Municipal Apartments on Calle de Jerte that they would need to leave temporarily for a €3.8 million renovation. The project aims to address structural damage, dampness, leaks, and outdated climate systems. Most residents accepted alternative accommodation, with the promise of returning after the 14-month works. However, four tenants, including Ibáñez, refused to leave, fearing they might not be allowed back. Two have since been evicted, while Ibáñez and one other remain.
The city sought court authorization to enter the apartments and enforce the evictions. While two courts previously sided with the council, the latest ruling diverged, emphasizing that the issue was not the city's right to renovate, but whether it could suspend a resident's housing rights without robust technical evidence. The judge found that the city's main evidence—a brief internal memo—did not constitute a sufficient technical report to prove that the works required the building to be completely empty. The court also noted that the situation did not involve imminent danger or demolition, and that phased construction allowing residents to stay had not been ruled out.
Opposition parties and local groups have criticized the city's approach. Más Madrid spokesperson Rita Maestre argued that less disruptive options were available, while the neighborhood association La Chispera called on the council to end what it described as a strategy of pressure and to expedite the start of renovations so residents can return to normal life. Socialist councillor Ana Lima urged the mayor to abandon any appeal, calling the city's actions unjustified and harmful to the elderly tenants.
Ibáñez, who has lived in the San Francisco apartments for 15 years, welcomed the court's decision but remains cautious. He maintains that the city is using the building's condition as a pretext for eviction, rather than genuine repairs. The city, for its part, insists that the renovations are essential for safety and that delays have prevented residents from returning. Some tenants rejected the alternative of moving to regional care homes, citing higher costs—up to 86% of their pension compared to 10–15% for municipal rent—and the distance from their neighborhood.
The legal debate centers on whether the city can require all residents to vacate for renovations without clear technical necessity. The court's ruling suggests that more substantial evidence is needed to justify such a move. This echoes broader tensions in Spain over housing rights, especially for vulnerable groups. Similar disputes have arisen in other regions, as seen when Catalonia introduced measures to limit speculative property purchases in high-demand areas—a move detailed in this recent report on Catalonia's housing policy.
For now, Ibáñez remains in his apartment, stating he would consider leaving only if the city guarantees his rights and rental terms in writing. The outcome of the city's potential appeal could set a precedent for how Spanish municipalities balance urgent building works with the rights of long-term tenants, particularly the elderly. The case also highlights the challenges faced by local governments in managing aging public housing stock, the legal complexities of eviction, and the social costs of displacing vulnerable residents. As Spain's population ages and demand for affordable senior housing grows, such conflicts may become increasingly common in urban centers like Madrid.
