Ruling 21/2023 of the Malaga Provincial Court, Fifth Section, of 23 January. deals with a case of fraud of law in a fixed-term lease agreement. Being in fact a residential rental contract as regulated in the Urban Leases Act, it was made in the form of a fixed-term rental agreement, in an attempt by the landlord to circumvent the application of the current regulations on the minimum duration of contracts, even linking up to three successive contracts in time, from 2016 to 2019.
This fraudulent manoeuvre in no way serves to avoid the application of the current legislation on residential leases. If a lease is for a habitable building whose primary purpose is to satisfy the tenant’s permanent housing needs, that is a residential rental contract, as defined in article 2 of the Urban Leases Act, and whose minimum mandatory duration for the landlord is five years from the date of the contract. This regardless of whether it is called a “fixed-term lease agreement”, whether it is stated that its duration is eleven months, or whether it includes any clause of waiver of rights that will have to be considered null and void, according to Section 9 of the Urban Leases Act.
In the case of the aforementioned ruling, the Court confirms that the contract is not a fixed-term lease agreement, but a rental contract for residential purpose, and therefore it has the extensions established in the Urban Leases Act, so, it has not expired.
