As of today, Naturalistes de Gelida has filed two administrative judicial proceedings against the Agroparc project of Ametller Origen. One at the High Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC), against the modification of the general plan of Gelida (MPOUM) that allows the establishment of the Agroparc, and the other at the Administrative Court number 3 of Barcelona, against the Urban Planning Agreement signed between the Town Hall and the company, in which they included a clause stating that the works could be initiated and even concluded without having previously carried out the compensatory measures for the eagle. In both cases, urgent measures were also requested to protect the booted eagles of Gelida, as the Agroparc overlaps with their critical hunting and survival area.
The precautionary measures are the only judicial procedure that allows the suspension of the execution of the works while a contentious process is being processed and until the judgment is issued, provided that irreversible damage can be proven. In the case of the Agroparc, the impact on the booted eagles, a protected and endangered species, justified this sufficiently. Nevertheless, precautionary measures are granted very rarely, and almost never in urban planning matters; however, given the excessive impact of the works, the platform opted to request them anyway and see what the judge's conclusions were.
Acceptance of precautionary measures from Court number 3 and their ineffectiveness
Surpassing all expectations, on 28 July 2025, the Administrative Court number 3 of Barcelona issued a ruling in which the precautionary measures were upheld and ordered the suspension of all activities within the critical area (80% of the vital territory of the eagles) until the Wildlife and Flora Service certified that the compensatory measures were actually implemented and functioning. This decision, precisely due to its exceptional nature, strongly validated the solidity of our arguments. (More information inthis article from our blogof 31 July)
However, Ametller Origen began large earthworks within the protected area, completely ignoring the court order. It was necessary for the Mossos d'Esquadra and the Rural Agents to intervene on 6 August to stop them. Subsequently, on 11 August, the duty court ordered the Rural Agents and the Gelida Town Council to monitor the situation and ensure compliance with the prohibition. It also warned the company and the Town Council that failing to obey the law could result in fines and even possible criminal charges.
From that moment on, judicial confusion took hold of the process. Amid repeated requests for clarification from the judge, the company resumed earthworks on 18 September. These works continue to this day, despite the claims from StopAgroparc. Paradoxically, we find ourselves with precautionary measures that, despite still being in force, are not being applied in practice. An absolutely unusual situation, and against which we have exhausted all judicial and administrative avenues available to us. (More information inthis article from our blogof 24 September)
The TSJC denies the precautionary measures for the protection of the eagles.
This time yes, as was to be expected, the TSJC, in its ruling of 4 November 2025, dismissed our request in a resolution that, on the other hand, was completely lacking in motivation. The judges basically argued that the 'general interest' of maintaining the executability of the new plan prevails and highlighted that the Generalitat has classified the project as of 'high territorial interest'.
Despite the majority decision of two of the three judges, the third judge issued adissenting opinionstrongly and well-argued. She warned that the damage caused by the execution of the project could be 'irreparable or irreversible'. She reminded that the Agroparc area coincides with the hunting and breeding areas essential for the survival of the eagles.
The judge emphasised that the official environmental report required the approval and execution of a Pilot Plan and prior verification – through radio tracking of the male – that the eagles could do without that area before any earthworks began. These measures had to be 'immediate and always prior'. For her, proceeding without this verification constitutes the 'consummation of the extinction of the eagles', rendering any future ruling useless.
It is relevant to emphasise that, as of today, this ruling is still not final, the StopAgroparc Platform has challenged it through a request for reconsideration prior to an appeal to the Supreme Court.
The two legal disputes are proceeding without protection for the eagles.
Achieving protection for the eagles conferred by the precautionary measures would have avoided significant environmental damage to the essential habitat of this endangered species. It would have given us time to progress in the disputes with the peace of mind of knowing that the eagle was protected. And that is why we had to try. Unfortunately, it has not been possible, but the reality is that we knew from the very beginning that it was practically impossible for it to happen.
The substantive arguments remain strong, including the incompatibility of the project with the survival of the Bonelli's eagle, and the serious urban and environmental irregularities, elements that reinforce our demand for nullity. The precautionary measures estimated by the judge and the fact that a magistrate of the TSJC issued a Particular Vote in favour of the suspension of the MPOUM, provides us with a valuable validation of the consistency of our arguments and illuminates the path towards a favourable final ruling which, although it will come later, will be the true victory for the defence of the natural space and legality.
This, however, is not the only avenue we have pursued to protect the critical vital area of the eagle; we have also worked on the channels of the Wildlife Service, which is responsible for safeguarding protected wildlife, and that of the Environmental Prosecutor, about which we will keep you informed in future publications.