Why the Spanish Supreme Court has annulled the NRA: analysis of judgment STS 620/2026 of 21 May 2026
On 21 May 2026, the Third Chamber (Administrative Division) of the Spanish Supreme Court issued judgment 620/2026, partially annulling Royal Decree 1312/2024 of 23 December, which created the Digital One-Stop-Shop for Rentals and the Single Rental Registry for short-term lettings (NRA / NRUA).
The judgment resolves the appeal brought by the Generalitat Valenciana against the Royal Decree and represents the judicial confirmation of virtually all the competence-related observations that the Council of State had made to the Government in its opinion CE-D-2024-1926 of 18 December 2024.
This analysis is based on the official press release of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ). The full text will be published in the CENDOJ repository in the coming days or weeks.
Supreme Court, Administrative Chamber. Judgment STS 620/2026.
Appellant: Generalitat Valenciana. Respondent: Central Spanish State.
👉 Official CGPJ press release
The news: the State lacked competence
The central conclusion of the judgment is clear: the State lacks constitutional competence to create an exhaustive and centralised Single Rental Registry that overlaps with the regional registries of tourist dwellings already existing in each autonomous community.
The Supreme Court rejects the three competence titles invoked by the Government:
- Article 149.1.8 of the Constitution (public registries): the NRA is not a civil registry of in rem rights, but an administrative registry of control over economic activity.
- Article 149.1.13 of the Constitution (planning of economic activity): justifies coordination, not exhaustive regulation.
- Article 149.1.1 of the Constitution (equality): no basis for an administrative inscription procedure.
What is annulled and what is preserved
This is a partial annulment, with a precise dividing line:
- ❌ Annulled: the Single Rental Registry itself as a State administrative procedure; the administrative qualification by Property Registrars; the registration number as a covert authorisation.
- ✅ Preserved: the Digital One-Stop-Shop for Rentals as a coordination mechanism; the data transmission obligations of digital platforms (EU Regulation 2024/1028); statistical data sharing.
The thread: the judgment matches the Council of State
The Council of State, in its opinion CE-D-2024-1926, had already warned the Government of ten essential observations, several of them competence-related and all of constitutional significance. The Government approved the Royal Decree despite this. The Supreme Court now confirms, in essence, that the Council of State was right.
The ten Council of State observations, contrasted one by one
1. EU Regulation 2024/1028 did not require a single State registry ✅ Confirmed
2. Competence problem State vs. autonomous communities ✅ Confirmed
3. Improper use of the Property Registry ✅ Implicitly confirmed
4. Insufficient regulatory rank ⚖️ Partially addressed
5. Registration number as covert authorisation ✅ Confirmed
6. Duplication with regional registries ✅ Confirmed
7. Technical problems with Property Registry ⚖️ Resolved by annulment
8. Potentially excessive annual reporting model ⚖️ Implicitly addressed
9. Poorly resolved sanctioning regime ⚖️ Pending
10. Premature entry into force ⚖️ Superseded issue
Constitutional foundations
State competences accepted: 149.1.13 CE (coordination, not exhaustive regulation), 149.1.31 CE (statistics).
State competences rejected as basis: 149.1.8 CE (public registries does not extend to administrative tourism control), 149.1.13 CE understood as exhaustive regulation, 149.1.1 CE (equality does not justify substituting regional registries).
Autonomous competences protected: 148.1.18 CE (regional promotion of tourism), 148.1.3 CE (housing and urban planning).
Judicial context and precedents
The judgment does not arise in a vacuum:
- STC 16/2018 on the Valencian Decree on tourist dwellings: the Constitutional Court already recalled that substantive tourism regulation is autonomous competence.
- STC 28/2023 on the State Housing Act: the Constitutional Court significantly qualified the scope of State competence titles on housing.
- CJEU doctrine on Airbnb (C-390/18, 2019): the CJEU recognised the legitimate regulatory margin of Member States (and their sub-State entities) but required proportionality.
Next steps
- Publication of full text in CENDOJ.
- Government reaction: acceptance, legislative initiative or negotiation with autonomous communities.
- Platform repositioning: Airbnb, Booking, Vrbo maintain their EU 2024/1028 data transmission obligations.
- Regional registries reactivation: Andalusia, Catalonia, Madrid, Canary Islands, Balearics, Valencia recover full centrality.
Do you have an NRA file in progress? Your situation has changed
Judgment STS 620/2026 modifies the panorama. If your NRA is granted, denied, suspended or pending, it is advisable to review your position.
FAQ
What has the Supreme Court decided about the NRA?
It has partially annulled Royal Decree 1312/2024. The Single Rental Registry is annulled; the Digital One-Stop-Shop and data transmission by platforms remain.
Who appealed?
The Generalitat Valenciana was the main appellant.
Why has the NRA been annulled?
For lack of constitutional competence of the State. Articles 149.1.8, 149.1.13 and 149.1.1 of the Constitution do not authorise the State to create an exhaustive administrative registry layered on top of regional ones.
Is the entire Royal Decree annulled?
No, it is a partial annulment. Coordination mechanisms remain.
Does this judgment confirm the Council of State?
Yes, fully on the competence side. Six of the ten essential observations have been confirmed.
When will the full text be published?
In the coming days or weeks in the CENDOJ repository of the Supreme Court.