Marginal note on construction work: the registrar cannot simply reject cancellation

Key data

If you have a property with a marginal note of "construction work" that has not been updated for decades, this resolution directly concerns you. The DGSJYFP has made clear that the registrar cannot close the entry door to the register—the so-called presentation entry—without explaining in a reasoned manner why the requested procedure is not valid.

The specific case: the appellant submitted a private application requesting cancellation of a marginal note of "housing under construction" that had been made by applying the RD 1093/1997 to a building registered in 1977, before that regulation existed. The registrar refused even to process the request. The DGSJYFP rules in favor of the property owner.

What does this regulation establish?

The resolution revolves around a fundamental legal distinction that the registrar confused:

The registrar treated the request as if it were a registration of end of work—which does require a notarial deed in accordance with RD 1093/1997—when in fact the appellant alleged that the marginal note was made by error, by applying a 1997 regulation to a building registered in 1977.

The DGSJYFP recalls that art. 246 of the Mortgage Law requires that the denial of the presentation entry be duly reasoned. It is not enough to reject: the registrar must explain why the error correction procedure alleged by the applicant is not appropriate. By failing to do so, he incurred an unjustified denial.

The resolution thus reinforces two principles:

• The presentation entry is the gateway to the register and can only be denied with express and sufficient reasoning.
• The private document is admissible when a manifest error of concept in the registration entries themselves is alleged, under arts. 40.c and 217 of the Mortgage Law.

Economic and operational impact

An uncanceled marginal note of "construction work" can create real and costly problems for the property owner:

• Blocking of transfers: the note can raise doubts in buyers and financial entities about the legal status of the property, making sale or obtaining financing difficult.
• Avoided notarial cost: if the registrar had been right, the property owner would have had to execute a notarial deed of end of work—with the associated cost—to cancel the note. The resolution opens the way for private documents, eliminating that expense.
• Cost of appeal: the property owner had to file an appeal with the DGSJYFP for the request to even be admitted. The resolution does not address the merits of the matter (whether cancellation is appropriate), but only that the request must be processed.
• Legal certainty: the resolution requires registrars to justify their denials, which reduces arbitrariness and protects citizens against unfounded rejections.

Who does it affect?

• Property owners with marginal notes of "construction work" or similar that do not correspond to the current reality of the property, especially if they were registered before the entry into force of RD 1093/1997.
• Developers and builders with old properties on which marginal notes were made by regulatory error.
• Real estate managers and advisors who process transactions on properties with charges or marginal notes of questionable validity.
• Property registrars, who are required to expressly justify any denial of the presentation entry in accordance with art. 246 LH.
• Lawyers and notaries who advise on registration correction processes.

Practical example

A property owner has a house registered in the Property Register in 1977. At some later point, the registrar made a marginal note of "housing under construction" by applying the RD 1093/1997, a regulation that did not exist when the building was registered. The house has been completed and inhabited for decades, but the note remains active in the register.

The property owner wants to sell and the buyer—or their bank—detects the note and asks for it to be canceled. The property owner submits a private application to the register alleging registration error (arts. 40.c and 217 LH). The Algeciras registrar no. 1 refuses even to admit the request, without explaining why the error correction procedure would not be valid.

After the appeal, the DGSJYFP requires the registrar to admit the application and process it. The property owner does not need a notarial deed to initiate the process: a private document is sufficient. If the registrar still disagrees with the cancellation, he must justify it with specific arguments, not simply close the door.

What should property owners do now?

1. Review the registration history of your property. Request a simple note from the Property Register and check if there is any marginal note of "construction work" or other charge that does not correspond to the current reality of the property.
2. Identify if the note was made by error. If the building predates 1997 and the note was made by applying RD 1093/1997, you have a solid argument of registration error under arts. 40.c and 217 of the Mortgage Law.
3. Submit a private application to the register. You do not need a notarial deed to initiate the error correction process. A private document is sufficient for the registrar to be required to admit the request and process it.
4. If the registrar denies presentation, demand justification. In accordance with art. 246 LH, the denial must be expressly reasoned. If it is not, you can file an appeal with the DGSJYFP.
5. Consult with a lawyer or manager specialized in registration law before acting, especially if the transaction is linked to a sale or financing in progress.

Official source

Consult complete regulation in official source

Notice: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific decisions, consult a qualified professional. Source: https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2026-21918