Ordered to close your premises: how to appeal the closure order and stay open

The deadline is 1 month. If the order exhausts the administrative route, the appeal is a reconsideration appeal (recurso de reposición) and the deadline is set by article 124.1 of Ley 39/2015. If the order is signed by a body that does not exhaust the administrative route, the appeal is a higher appeal (recurso de alzada) and the deadline is set by article 122.1 of the same law. In both cases, it is 1 month.

The calculation is governed by article 30.4: the period is counted from the day following the notification and expires on the same day of the following month. If there is no equivalent day in the month of expiry, it expires on the last day of that month. And if the last day is a non-working day, it is extended to the first following working day (article 30.5).

If you let that 1 month pass, you still have 2 months from the notification to go to court (article 46.1 of Ley 29/1998). Once those 2 months are exhausted, the order becomes final and consented to: the closure is no longer debated, neither before the Town Hall nor before a court.

Submitting early is not a courtesy recommendation, it is money. The 1 month that works in your favour does not start running with the notification, but when your document enters the electronic registry. Every day you delay submitting it is 1 more day with the premises closed.

Article 117.1 of Ley 39/2015 states that filing an appeal does not suspend the execution of the challenged act. On its own, the appeal reopens nothing. You must request the suspension, and you must request it expressly.

Article 117.3 is the part that almost no one uses: the execution of the challenged act shall be understood as suspended if, after 1 month has elapsed since the suspension request entered the electronic registry of the competent Administration to decide on it, the body responsible for resolving the appeal has not issued and notified an express resolution in this regard. This is positive silence, and it operates by operation of law.

The Supreme Court, in a ruling of 25 October 2022, established that this 1 month starts counting from when the document enters the electronic registry, not from when it reaches the specific body that must resolve it. That is why the entry receipt is the central proof of the file: without it, the date cannot be proven.

The suspension operates without the need for the Administration to declare it and without a certificate of presumed act. And there is a second layer in article 117.4: if you later go to court also requesting the suspension, the one already obtained is maintained until the judicial pronouncement on that request occurs. It does not fall away upon leaving the administrative route.

A limit worth knowing: the Supreme Court, in a ruling of 27 May 2026 (appeal 5122/2024), declared that this suspension by silence does not operate when what is appealed is a simple unqualified procedural act, because article 112 does not allow it to be challenged autonomously. A cessation order that decides the closure is indeed an appealable act.

The decision to appeal is not legal, it is arithmetic. Multiply the margin your premises fail to earn each day by the days it will be closed in each scenario. The days are not an estimate: they come from legal deadlines that are written and verified.

With the appeal submitted and the suspension requested, the reasonable horizon is between 35 and 40 days of closure, counted from the notification until the 1 month of article 117.3 expires. Without an appeal, the horizon is indefinite: the order gains firmness and the premises do not reopen with that title.

The administrative appeal does not accrue any tasa (official fee). The amount for our management and any other cost that might appear are detailed in the procedure file before you contract, not here, because these are figures that are updated.

The first thing to look at in the order is not the reason, it is the signature. Article 52.2 of Ley 7/1985 establishes that resolutions of the Plenary, the Mayor or President and the Governing Boards, as well as those of lower authorities and bodies when they resolve by delegation from them, exhaust the administrative route.

When the act exhausts the administrative route, the reconsideration appeal is optional: you can file it before the same body that issued the order or go directly to court (article 123.1 of Ley 39/2015). If you file it, you cannot go to court until it is resolved or understood as dismissed (article 123.2).

When the order is signed by a body that does not exhaust the administrative route, the appeal is a higher appeal before its hierarchical superior. The deadline to resolve changes: 3 months for a higher appeal compared to 1 month for a reconsideration appeal (articles 122.2 and 124.2). The deadline to file it remains 1 month in both cases.

Getting the appeal wrong is not usually fatal, because the document is qualified by its content and not by the name given to it, but getting the recipient wrong does delay the calculation of the 1 month of article 117.3. That is why we identify the body before writing anything.

There is a scenario where it is not even necessary to reach article 117. Article 98.1.b of Ley 39/2015 excludes from immediate execution the resolutions of procedures of a disciplinary nature against which any administrative appeal can be filed, including the optional reconsideration appeal.

Along the same lines, article 90.3 states that the resolution ending the disciplinary procedure will be executive when no ordinary administrative appeal can be filed against it. If the closure of your premises is an accessory penalty and is still within the appeal period, the Administration should not be executing it.

Beware of a shortcut that closes the door. Article 85.3 allows reductions of at least 20% on the penalty amount, but its effectiveness is conditional on the responsible party withdrawing or waiving any action or administrative appeal against the penalty. If you pay with a reduction, you waive the right to appeal the closure attached to that penalty.

Not all cessation orders are fought in the same way. If the closure is based on your responsible declaration not being valid, article 69.4 of Ley 39/2015 requires that specific facts of inaccuracy, falsehood or omission of an essential nature be verified. The Town Hall disagreeing with a technical criterion is not the same as an essential falsehood, and that distinction is the axis of the appeal.

If the closure is due to noise, capacity or opening hours, the ground is evidentiary: measurements, inspection reports, chain of custody of the devices, calibration and whether you were given a hearing before resolving. A serious procedural defect can take the appeal to article 117.2.b, which allows suspension when the challenge is based on causes of absolute nullity of article 47.1.

If the closure is due to a lack of a licence, the route is usually article 117.2.a: damages of impossible or difficult repair. Here it is not enough to say you lose money. You must document payrolls, rent, supply contracts and commitments with suppliers, because what is proven is that the business will not survive the closure even if they later prove you right.

When we request the suspension, we request it for both reasons if the case allows them, and with the economic documentation attached from the first document. A request without proof is the one the Administration resolves within the deadline and denies.

Do not break the seal. Disregarding an express and notified order from the authority can constitute a crime of serious disobedience under article 556 of the Criminal Code, punishable by 3 months to 1 year in prison or a fine. A debatable administrative file thus becomes a criminal matter, and the appeal loses all its strength.

Do not let the 1 month pass while you negotiate by phone with the Town Hall. Conversations do not interrupt deadlines. Only the document entering the registry interrupts them.

Do not submit the appeal without requesting the suspension. It is the most expensive mistake of all: the appeal alone leaves the premises closed throughout the processing, and the silence of article 24.1 works against you because procedures challenging acts are understood as dismissed.

If the case ends up needing the judicial route, we will tell you in writing and in advance. That phase requires a procurador (court representative) and is not part of this assignment, so you will know exactly what you are contracting and what you are not before paying anything.