Renunciation of ownership in horizontal property: why developers cannot abandon apartments without community consent

Key data

If your company is a developer and has apartments, premises or elements in horizontal property ownership that it no longer wishes to maintain, it is not enough to sign an abdicative renunciation deed. The Resolution from the General Directorate of Legal Security and Public Faith (DGSJFP) of 9 July 2026, published on 22 October 2026, definitively closes that path without community consent.

The specific case involves Intermobiliaria SA, which attempted to register the abdicative renunciation of two properties under horizontal property ownership regime in Arona. The registrar suspended the registration. The company appealed. The DGSJFP dismissed the appeal and consolidated the criterion: renunciation is not registrable when it generates vacancy incompatible with the registration system or affects third-party rights without their express consent.

What does this regulation establish?

The resolution analyzes the limits of abdicative renunciation in the context of horizontal property ownership, applying two key rules:

• Art. 6.2 of the Civil Code: renunciation of rights is only valid when it does not contradict public interest or order nor harms third parties.
• Horizontal Property Law (LPH): private elements carry associated participation quotas in common expenses. Unilateral abandonment of those elements transfers the economic burden to other owners without their consent.

Intermobiliaria SA's argument was that the use and enjoyment of the properties corresponded by statute to owners of other phases of the development, not to the renouncing company, and that transfer had been previously attempted without success. The DGSJFP rejected both arguments:

• That another person uses the property does not eliminate registration ownership nor the associated economic obligations.
• The failed transfer attempt does not enable unilateral renunciation as an alternative path.

Economic and operational impact

For a developer, maintaining elements in horizontal property ownership without use or profitability entails continuous costs: community fees, special assessments, property tax and maintenance. The temptation to "release" those assets through abdicative renunciation is understandable, but this resolution blocks that exit.

The specific operational consequences are:

• The abdicative renunciation deed will not be registered in the Property Registry if there is no express consent from the community of owners.
• The company will remain the registered owner and, therefore, will continue to be liable for community fees and other charges.
• Attempting registration without meeting the requirements generates notarial and registration costs without useful result.
• The only valid path to divest the element is transfer (sale, donation or transfer with acceptance) or renunciation with express community consent.

Who does it affect?

• Real estate developers with unsold or unused elements in communities of owners, especially in phased developments.
• Communities of owners that receive pressure from developers to accept renunciations that would transfer economic burdens to other neighbors.
• Holders of elements in horizontal property ownership (companies or individuals) that explore formulas to dispose of problematic assets.
• Legal advisors and notaries who must warn their clients of the registration infeasibility of this formula without community consent.
• Property registrars, who have express support from the DGSJFP to deny this type of registrations.

Practical example

The case itself is the most illustrative example: Intermobiliaria SA was the owner of two properties under horizontal property ownership regime in Arona. The use and enjoyment of those properties corresponded by statute to owners of other phases of the development, not to the company itself. Faced with the impossibility of transferring them previously, Intermobiliaria SA executed an abdicative renunciation deed.

The property registrar of Arona suspended the registration because the properties had participation quotas in common expenses and their abandonment would harm other owners without their consent. Intermobiliaria SA appealed to the DGSJFP arguing that actual use did not correspond to it and that it had already attempted transfer. The DGSJFP dismissed the appeal: the deed cannot be registered. Intermobiliaria SA remains the registered owner of those two properties and continues to be liable for their economic charges until it finds a valid transfer path or obtains express community consent.

What should companies do now?

1. Audit your portfolio of elements in horizontal property ownership: identify which properties you have registered in the company's name in communities of owners, especially if you do not use or exploit them.
2. Rule out unilateral abdicative renunciation as an option: this resolution confirms that it is not registrable if it generates vacancy or harms third parties without their consent. Avoid incurring notarial and registration costs without result.
3. Explore transfer as a priority path: sale, donation or transfer with acceptance are the valid formulas to divest the asset and its associated charges.
4. Negotiate with the community of owners: if the only viable exit is renunciation, you need express community consent. Start that negotiation with specialized legal advice.
5. Consult with your legal advisor before executing a deed: any operation of this type must go through a prior analysis of registration feasibility to avoid unnecessary expenses and registration blocks.

Official source

View 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-2026-22053