Algeciras Hosts the First Celebration of the 10th Anniversary of AIYON Lawyers

On Thursday, 29 May, the entire AIYON Abogados team celebrated the firm’s 10th anniversary at an event held at the Hotel Alborán in Algeciras, attended by our clients and friends, as well as our regular collaborators, with whom we form a solid team of lawyers and experts.

At this pleasant event, we brought together leading operators and various stakeholders from the logistics and transport sector in Algeciras and the rest of the province of Cádiz, as well as some local authorities, to commemorate a significant milestone in our professional career.

Multiple local media outlets reported this news, which undoubtedly fills us with pride for the effort and dedication that the team has put into achieving this goal, but above all for its five partners, Enrique Ortiz (head of the Cadiz office), Verónica Meana (head of the Madrid office), Mikel Garteiz-goxeaskoa and Zuberoa Elorriaga (heads of the Bilbao office) and José Antonio Domínguez (head of the Algeciras office); partners who work side by side with the rest of the team in handling all kinds of matters related to their specialities.

Founded in 2015 in the city of Bilbao, AIYON Abogados is one of the few specialist law firms currently operating in Spain that provides advice in the areas of maritime law, transport law (both land and air), insurance law and international trade, addressing all of its clients’ legal needs thanks to a highly qualified and multidisciplinary team of lawyers and a network of trusted collaborators in other areas of law (criminal, tax, commercial, and labour), enabling them to offer a 360º legal service. In fact, last March, we were once again highlighted by the prestigious British legal guide Chambers & Partners in the category of ‘Shipping – Maritime Law’ for Spain, and we also contributed to the chapter on Maritime Law in Spain for the guide The International Comparative Legal Guides, 2025 (ICLG).

This is the firm’s first celebration in this momentous year 2025, which will be followed by a second celebration in Bilbao after the summer, serving as the grand finale to commemorate a decade of work and joint effort, with all eyes set on the next 10 years. Congratulations, AIYON Abogados!

Read more in Diario El Canal…

Read more in Diario El Puerto…

Read more in El Estrecho Digital…

Read more in Transporte XXI…

Read more in La Voz Digital…

Royal Decree 205/2025 of 18 March Establishing the Criteria for the Determination of Vehicle Charges/Exemptions/Reductions for the Use of Certain Infrastructures

The aforementioned Royal Decree 205/2025, approved on 18 March 2025 and coming into force on 19 March 2025, aims to adapt the current regulations on criteria for determining the tolls to be applied to goods vehicles with a maximum authorised mass of more than 3.5 tonnes on motorways under concession on the State Road Network, in accordance with the provisions of Directive (EU) 2022/362 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 February 2022 amending Directives 1999/62/EC, 1999/37/EC and (EU) 2019/520 as regards the charging of vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures.

Therefore, this Royal Decree has as its precedent Directive (EU) 2022/362 of the European Parliament, and its purpose is to transpose the content of Article 1 of the aforementioned European regulation, adapting the criteria for the determination of tolls under concession and tolls for motorways operated in accordance with the provisions of the seventh additional provision of Law 37/2015, of 29 September, on roads. This, repealing the previous Royal Decree 286/2014, of 25 April, establishing the criteria for determining the tolls to be applied to certain goods transport vehicles on motorways under concession on the State Road Network.

Directive (EU) 2022/362 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 February 2022 amending Directives 1999/62/EC, 1999/37/EC and (EU) 2019/520/EC as regards the charging of vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures, whose approval introduces amendments to Directive 1999/62/EC, with the objectives of aligning it with the challenges of climate change, noise and congestion, making progress in the application of the ‘polluter pays’ and ‘user pays’ principles, promoting environmentally sustainable but also socially equitable road transport.

One of the main changes proposed in this new RD is that the term ‘heavy goods vehicle’ is deleted and replaced by the term ‘vehicles in general’, meaning motor vehicles, with four or more wheels, or a combination of articulated vehicles, intended for the carriage of passengers or goods by road or used for that purpose.

In addition, it includes six key annexes which: (i) specifies the main principles for cost allocation and toll calculation; (ii) classifies vehicles according to emission limits; (iii) classifies vehicles according to pavement damage; (iv/v) set out, respectively, the requirements for the determination of external cost tolls and the reference values for the corresponding tariffs; (vi) sets out pollutant emission performance criteria for light-duty vehicles.

This is on the basis that no category of vehicles may be required to pay tolls and any other charges for the use of the same road section at the same time. Similarly, any tolls will avoid discriminatory treatment of international traffic and distortions of competition between operators.

In addition, among other aspects, it establishes that, from 25 March 2026, for the determination of these charges, heavy goods vehicles will be charged for the external costs of atmospheric pollution caused by traffic. It also mentions that an additional cost for noise pollution may be added to this charge, depending on the stretch of road on which the heavy goods vehicle is travelling.

In short, Royal Decree 205/2025 introduces a series of modifications and adapts the European regulations, with which it coexists, in order to meet the objectives pursued by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, which is to introduce fair mechanisms for allocating the costs of infrastructure use in order to eliminate distortions of competition between transport companies in the Member States, promoting the proper functioning of the internal market and increasing competitiveness.

Regulation (EU) 2023/1805 on Renewable and Hypo-Carbon Fuels in Maritime Transport

Regulation (EU) 2023/1805 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 September 2023 on the use of renewable fuels and low-carbon fuels for maritime transport and amending Directive 2009/16/EC  represents a milestone in the transition towards more sustainable shipping in the European Union. In force since 12 October of the same year and applicable as of 1 January 2025, this regulation establishes new rules to promote the use of renewable and low-emission fuels in shipping within the EU. Its purpose is clear: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and move towards the climate commitments of the ‘European Green Pact’ which aims to create a climate-neutral Europe by transforming the way we produce and consume.

Maritime transport, which plays a key role in the global and European economy as it handles 75% of the EU’s external trade and 31% of internal trade, has a very significant environmental impact, accounting for 3-4% of total CO2 emissions in the region.

Faced with this challenge, Regulation (EU) 2023/1805 outlines a roadmap for the decarbonisation of the sector, driving the transition to cleaner energy sources. This initiative will not only reduce pollution but also ensure the competitiveness and sustainability of maritime transport in Europe.

The Regulation lays down specific rules to reduce the greenhouse gas intensity of fuels used in maritime transport. One of its main features is that it applies to ships with a gross tonnage of more than 5,000 tonnes operating in EU ports, irrespective of their country of origin or destination. In addition, progressive emission reduction targets are set, starting at 2% from 01 January 2025 and gradually increasing to 80% by 2050 (1). To achieve this, it calls for the use of renewable and low-carbon fuels such as advanced biofuels, hydrogen, green ammonia and electricity. It also promotes the use of wind-assisted propulsion as a viable alternative.

That said, one of the key elements of the regulation is the obligation to use electricity in ports. From 2030, container and passenger ships will have to be connected to the electricity grid at the quayside to avoid the use of combustion engines while in port. This measure will significantly reduce air pollution in coastal cities and improve air quality for local residents.

The implementation of Regulation (EU) 2023/1805 will have a positive impact on the reduction of pollutant emissions in maritime transport. This legislation is expected to drive innovation in propulsion technologies and encourage the development of more sustainable fuels, consolidating Europe’s leadership in green solutions for the maritime sector.

However, it also presents challenges, especially in economic terms. Shipping companies will have to invest heavily to adapt their fleets to meet the new standards. In addition, the development of adequate port infrastructures to ensure the supply of alternative fuels and the implementation of efficient electrical systems will be crucial.

Sanctions and enforcement systems: To ensure compliance with the regulation, a penalty system known as FuelEU will be implemented, which will penalise ship operators that fail to meet emission reduction targets. In addition, compensation between vessels within the same company will be allowed to balance compliance levels and facilitate a more flexible transition to clean fuels.

In conclusion, Regulation (EU) 2023/1805 marks a turning point in the regulation of maritime transport in the European Union. With these measures, the EU reaffirms its commitment to the fight against climate change and its leadership in promoting sustainable solutions for global transport, a clear example of commitment to future generations and the planet.

The effective implementation of this regulation will undoubtedly depend on the joint efforts of authorities, companies and operators in the maritime sector, who will have to adapt to this new era of green and responsible shipping and, although the transition to a more sustainable maritime industry involves challenges in terms of costs and technological adaptation, the long-term environmental and economic benefits are unquestionable.

(1) The regulation sets concrete targets compared to 2020 levels: 2% less in 2025, 6% in 2030, 14.5% in 2035, 31% in 2040, 62% in 2045 and 80% in 2050.

Organic Law 5/2024, of 11 November, on the Right to Defence

The right to defence and to the assistance of a lawyer is a set of powers and guarantees recognised to natural and legal persons to assert, in accordance with a previously established procedure, their rights, freedoms and legitimate interests in any type of dispute. It is expressly recognised in the second paragraph of Article 24 of the Spanish Constitution: ‘…everyone has the right to an ordinary judge predetermined by law, to a defence and the assistance of lawyer, to be informed of the charges against them, to a public trial without undue delay and with all the guarantees, to use the means of evidence relevant to their defence, not to testify against themselves, not to confess guilt and to the presumption of innocence’.

Thus, while case law and judicial practice have been consolidating standards of protection and aspects that have been consolidated as an inherent part of this fundamental right, it was necessary for this basic principle of our rule of law to be enshrined in an organic law. The Organic Law 5/2024, of 11 November, on the Right to Defence, which will come into force on 4 December 2024, is therefore born. Although most of the provisions in this law have already been addressed by other legislation, what is reflected, in reality, is the intention to develop them and to give them legal coating that ensures the effective exercise of the defence.

That said, we must stress that there is an inherent link between the Right of Defence and the Legal Defence. Although individuals can defend themselves in some cases, legal defence, carried out by a professional, is considered the most appropriate and secure means of protecting this right. Therefore, the independence and freedom of expression of lawyers and, in general, the exercise of their functions must be protected with all guarantees so that the quality and effective defence of the client is not compromised.

In the new O.L., the regulation of the right of defence is accompanied by the establishment of certain rules, both regulating the legal profession and the guarantees that allow its professional practice to provide an effective guarantee of the defence of individuals. In this context, the Bar Associations operate as an institutional guarantee of the right to defence, ensuring the independence and freedom of legal professionals in their daily work, as well as maintaining relations with the different administrations. In other words, the right of defence and the profession that best guarantees it are jointly regulated, as more than half of the articles focus on the ethical obligations of lawyers.

In this article we would like to highlight the most relevant issues of the Organic Law 5/2024, of 11 November, on the Right of Defence, which are summarised as follows:

-Transparency and accessibility of information provided to customers. It places greater responsibility on lawyers to communicate with their clients, who are entitled to receive clear and accessible information about their rights, legal procedures, the order form and the status of their files. It stresses the importance of legal aid being inclusive and tailored to the individual needs of each person, including an ethical and professional commitment to establish the necessary means for the effective defence of people in vulnerable situations.

Similarly, the need for transparency on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is included: the right to know the artificial intelligence criteria used by digital platforms for the choice of legal professional, procedure management, etc. and, in general, any legal service that is carried out electronically. Lawyers must be prepared to work in electronic environments to ensure accessibility and advocacy for their clients and will have grounds to challenge automated decisions that are not transparent.

-It ensures that lawyers can act freely, without fear of communications being used against them or to the detriment of the client, which is fundamental to the integrity of the right of defence. Professional secrecy and the protection of confidentiality are matters already regulated by professional codes of ethics, but this organic law introduces a very relevant issue: ‘Communications made exclusively between the advocates of the parties in the course of litigation or proceedings, whatever the time at which they take place or their purpose, even out of court, are confidential and may not be relied on in court nor have evidentiary value.’

This is one of the great advances of the law, as some lawyers dare to provide professional communications (despite being deontologically sanctioned), given the usual practice of courts and tribunals to offer evidentiary value to such communications.

Thus, in general, deontological obligations are reinforced, since many deontological duties, which lack legal rank, contemplated in rules such as the Code of Ethics of the Spanish Legal Profession or the General Statute of the Spanish Legal Profession, are elevated to the rank of law with the implementation of this regulation.

-Particularly important is the legal framework for establishing guidelines for professional fees within the Bar Associations. This issue created financial uncertainty for citizens as, in the absence of guidelines, it was very difficult to anticipate the costs of legal proceedings and to make informed decisions when hiring a lawyer.

With regard to this point, the use of the ‘order form’, a document in which the essential conditions of the order are determined, such as the object of the contracted services, their duration, the fees and method of payment, the treatment of allowances and substitutes, the intervention of other professionals, etc., is strengthened.

-The competence of the Bar Associations is strengthened; as an example, Article 23 of the present law states: ‘that the Consejo General de la Abogacía Española (CGAE) will be responsible for issuing interpretative circulars of the Code of Ethics, ensuring a uniform application of the ethical rules. These circulars provide clarity on the expectations of professional and ethical conduct, helping lawyers to align themselves with the official interpretations of the Code of Ethics.’This guarantee favours the constant improvement and professionalisation of the sector, ensuring that lawyers are prepared for the challenges of legal practice.

In addition to this, the second Additional Provision strengthens the position of the Bar Associations in the management of free legal aid services, allowing them to organise and supervise the legal aid office and to reinforce the Legal Advice Services (the Bar Associations will inform them about free legal aid ensuring that this guidance is especially accessible to the most vulnerable groups).

In conclusion, the Defence Law lays the foundations for a significant reform in the field of legal aid and the practice of law in Spain. Its effective implementation will depend, to a large extent, on the provision of adequate resources and on the collaboration between the Administration of Justice, the collegiate institutions and the professionals themselves. This legal framework aims to reinforce confidence in the justice system and to dignify the practice of law, consolidating its role in the defence of citizens’ rights.

On the Additional Validity Requirements for the Effectiveness of Jurisdiction Clauses in Bills of Lading

It is common practice in the international maritime transport of goods for shipping lines to offer their own general conditions of contract, and for the rest of the actors in the sector to adhere to them. Therefore, the consignees, receivers of the goods carried under the bill of lading (B/L), do not in practice have the capacity to negotiate the terms of these documents; but by acquiring the bill of lading, they succeed to the shipper’s rights and obligations. The clauses conferring jurisdiction to resolve possible disputes that may arise between the parties are also included in these general conditions.

Law 14/2014, of 24 July, on Maritime Navigation (LMN), has tried to protect these consignees by drafting articles 251 and 468 of the LMN. Article 251 of the LMN provides that the acquirer of the bill of lading is also the acquirer of all the rights and actions of the transferor over the goods, except for those referring to jurisdiction and arbitration agreements, which should be adjusted to the provisions of Article 468 LMN, which establishes that clauses of submission to foreign jurisdiction or arbitration abroad that have not been negotiated individually or separately will be null and void.

This is the issue raised in our post ‘Scope of the international jurisdiction clause in Bills of Lading’ of 14 May 2024. Following the judgment of 25 April 2024 of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in cases C-345/22 to C-347/22, resolving the questions referred to in a preliminary ruling by the Provincial Court of Pontevedra, it is now the turn of the mentioned court to deliver its judgment.

Since the adoption of the LMN, the Provincial Courts have interpreted differently the reference made by the CJEU in the case of ‘Coreck Maritime GmbH v Handelsveem BV and others (C-387/98)’ to the ‘applicable national law’ of the State hearing the dispute in relation to the enforceability of these clauses against third parties:

  • The law governing the substantive validity of the jurisdiction agreement, which according to Article 25(1) of the Brussels I bis Regulation is the law of the State whose courts have been designated by the parties, including the rules of private international law (cf. Article 20 of the Regulation).
  • The national law which, according to the rules of private international law of the forum, governs the legal relationship whose succession is in dispute.
  • The lex fori (the domestic law of the State before whose courts the action is brought).

In this respect, and as the CJEU did in its response to the questions raised, the Provincial Court of Pontevedra is clear in stating that ‘when Community case law refers to domestic law to judge on the transfer of rights in the security, that domestic rule is not necessarily Art. 251 LMN, but the reference must be understood as being made to the rules of private international law’. Therefore, according to the Provincial Court of Pontevedra in its ruling, we must look for the applicable conflict rule. In accordance with the facts in dispute, whether applying the Rome I Regulation or art.10.3 Spanish Civil Code (even in application of arts. 100, 102 and 165 of Law 19/1985 of 16 July 1985 on Exchange and Cheque), conflict rules lead to the same point, and not to Spanish law; in the contested case it would be Peruvian substantive law that would be applicable to the enforceability of these clauses. However, in these cases, the parties did not prove the content and validity of the foreign law, so the court understood that it should refer to domestic law according to the general rules contained in art.33.3 of Law 29/2015, of 30 July on International Legal Cooperation in Civil Matters. It is thanks to the lack of proof of foreign law that the Provincial Court of Pontevedra applies the Maritime Navigation Act. This was essential for the Court of Justice of the European Union to be able to rule on the second question, i.e. whether inserting additional validity requirements for the effectiveness of jurisdiction clauses in bills of lading is contrary to the Brussels I bis Regulation.

And in this sense, the Provincial Court of Pontevedra upholds the thesis of the CJEU, when it rules: the principle of the primacy of EU law makes it necessary to invalidate the last paragraph of the provision, which provides for an exception to full subrogation in respect of jurisdiction and arbitration clauses. Excluding that rule, Community legislation and case law must be applied, which admits the provision of the plaintiff’s consent in the form in which it is set out in the title (cf. art. 35.1 [sic] of the Brussels I bis Regulation), thereby overriding the requirement that the recipient addressee, holder of the knowledge, express its consent individually and separately’. In other words, EU Member States cannot add in their substantive law additional requirements to those foreseen by Art. 25(1) of the Brussels I bis Regulation.

Thus, the Provincial Court of Pontevedra affirms the effectiveness against third parties of the clauses conferring jurisdiction contained in the B/L and declares the lack of jurisdiction of the Spanish courts to hear the dispute, in favour of the court of the United Kingdom specified in the clause. Therefore, the clause will be enforceable against the third party holder of the B/L provided that it has been recognised as valid in the relationship between the shipper and the carrier that concluded the contract and that the third party has been subrogated to all the rights and obligations of one of these original parties, in accordance with the applicable national law, determined by virtue of the rules of private international law of the Member State hearing the dispute. Where the clause grants jurisdiction to the courts of an EU state, the manner in which consent is given is not governed by national law as long as it departs from the formal and substantive validity requirements of Art. 25 BIT-bis).  The LMN, as currently drafted, will only become operational when the Brussels I bis Regulation or an international treaty standard does not apply.

The resolution of the question undoubtedly limits the application of Article 251 of the LMN.

In the case at hand, which occurred in pre-Brexit times, the UK was still a member state of the EU, so the form of consent was that of Art.25 RBI-bis, as it is to any jurisdiction clause in favour of European courts. However, after Brexit, the jurisdiction clause in favour of UK courts, which is very common, would no longer be subject to the aforementioned European regulation and could therefore be subject to the regime of the Maritime Navigation Act. Without its individual and separate negotiation it would not be recognised, like any other clause in favour of non-European courts or arbitration clauses.

Laura Cabello Joins the Aiyon Algeciras Office

Following the departure of Rocío López, to whom we wish her all the best in her new career and with whom we continue to work closely, the new lawyer of the team, Laura Cabello, now attends the AIYON office in Algeciras together with the partner in charge of the office, José Antonio Domínguez.

After a few months of adaptation in our Cadiz office, working in direct contact with the two local partners on all kinds of cases, Laura now faces the challenges of an important logistics hub such as the Port of Algeciras, which has a strategic geographical location, her daily activity being a true reflection of the relevance of the maritime and logistics sector in general in the province of Cadiz.

Laura, a member of the Malaga Bar Association, holds a Law Degree from the University of Cadiz (2017) and a Master’s Degree in Access to the Legal Profession from the Malaga Bar Association (2022). She also has a specialisation in International Maritime Law from the Universidad Pontificia de Comillas (Madrid) ICADE- in collaboration with the Spanish Maritime Institute – IME (2023), with specific training in navigation areas, maritime safety, inspection, certification of ships and prevention of maritime pollution.

During her time at university, Laura actively participated in conferences and congresses organised by the Department of International Public Law of the University of Cadiz, where she had the opportunity to deepen her knowledge of key issues of International Law; knowledge that she later expanded with an in-depth study of procedural law.

After successfully passing the entrance exam to the Spanish Bar in June 2022, she completed several internships in the banking sector, where she put into practice her expertise in the development and drafting of lawsuits, appeals and foreclosure of mortgage deeds. She also conducted pre-trial and trial hearings in banking and criminal proceedings.

Given the interest she has always shown in international practice, in July 2024 she joined AIYON Abogados, where she is working in the different areas of maritime law, inland transport law and international trade law, specialising in the management of claims on maritime and inland transport contracts, administrative sanctioning procedures for ships, recovery and maritime insurance.

Revised Limits of Liability Under the Montreal Convention 1999

In 2024, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has proceeded to review the liability limits in accordance with the provisions of Article 24 of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, done in Montreal on May 28, 1999 – Montreal Convention of 1999, which states that the liability limits prescribed in Articles 21, 22 and 23 relating to destruction, loss, damage or delay of passengers, cargo or baggage, established in Special Drawing Rights (SDR), will be reviewed every five years.

Since it was rules in 1999, the Montreal Convention has suffered variations with respect to the limits originally established both in 2009 and in 2019, this being the latest modification, which will take effect on December 28, 2024.

Consequently, and with the appropriate exceptions or requirements to be reviewed in the Montreal Convention for each of the items, articles 21 and 22 of the Montreal Convention are modified as set forth below:

  • Article 21, compensation in case of death or injury of passengers: 151,880 SDR
  • Article 22.1, in case of damage caused by delay in the transport of people: 6,303 SDR
  • Articles 22.2, in case of destruction, loss, damage or delay in the transport of baggage: 1,519 SDR
  • Article 22.3, in case of destruction, loss, damage or delay in the transport of cargo: 26 SDR

This amendment to articles 21 and 22 of the Montreal Convention has been published in the Spanish Official Gazette num. 50, dated 27 February 2025.

AIYON collaborates with the ‘Diario del Puerto’ in its report ‘Legal Allies’

The special report entitled ‘Legal Allies’, recently published by the specialised newspaper of the logistics and transport sector, ‘Diario del Puerto’, has counted on the collaboration of our colleagues Verónica Meana and Zuberoa Elorriaga, among other professionals of the sector.

After analysing the various questions posed to us, which covered different aspects of our work and included our vision for the future in the face of new challenges, we discussed aspects such as the value of advice and prevention in conflict areas, the most common deficiencies and lack of knowledge in the sector, the role we play as lawyers and its importance in the transport sector, as well as the future challenges facing the world of transport, our lawyers provided their perspective, based on their broad and varied experience.

For her part, Zuberoa Elorriaga commented that the lack of the proper coordination and joint vision that should exist between the purchase and sale operation and the subsequent transport operation can give rise to claims and disputes, which could be avoided with good prior advice. We are talking about both the logistics operation and the insurance that accompanies it.

It considers that the transport phase must be highlighted as an essential complement that complements and perfects the sale and purchase from which it derives. Therefore, correct management of routes and delivery times to avoid delays or damage to the goods is essential, a task that always involves a cost if we want to guarantee a correct service at the hands of professionals.

Verónica Meana, in turn, explained that the EU’s growing demands to reduce emissions are forcing the transport sector to look for alternatives, such as the use of electric vehicles or cleaner fuels. All of this is causing concern among operators about the high costs of adapting their fleets, whether by sea, air or land, which will be required by the new regulation.

In addition, she points out that the delay in adopting digital solutions for optimising operations or complying with environmental regulations, and the lack of robustly implemented protocols among employees of transport companies to make them less susceptible to cyber-attacks, are factors that can be improved with good research and planning.

Access to the publication

AIYON Abogados, a Decade at the Service of Maritime and Transport Law

‘El Canal Marítimo y Logístico’ took advantage of the celebration of the annual meeting of AIYON Abogados S.L.P. to meet in Bilbao with the five partners of the firm. Close to celebrating 10 years in the market, each of them pointed out the strengths of their multidisciplinary team of lawyers, as well as the different challenges they face on a daily basis from their offices located in Madrid, Cadiz, Bilbao and Algeciras.

We invite you to rea the article in its entirety from the link at the end of this article, highlighting below some of the statements made by the partners.

As expert lawyers in chartering and leasing of vessels, both for general cargo and project cargo, AIYON has also been specializing in off.shore construction projects. In this regard, AIYON’s partner in Bilbao, Mikel Garteiz-goxeaskoa, states, ‘This experience has given us the opportunity to assist from our Bilbao office local companies such as SAITEC Offshore Technologies, S.L., in projects as innovative as the launching and installation of its DemoSATH floating offshore wind platform in the BIMEP test area (Armintza), in the open sea two miles off the coast, and in waters 90 meters deep, as AIYON aspires to be a benchmark for companies operating in this sector due to its in-depth knowledge of Maritime Law in all its areas’.

With regard to the specific offshore wind sector, Mikel Garteiz-goxeaskoa highlights the firm’s strengths: ‘In addition to our knowledge and experience, we also have a large international network of collaborating lawyers, also specialized in these matters, mainly from the United Kingdom and Northern Europe. This allows us to rely at all times on up-to-date professionals in their respective jurisdictions to resolve any issued that may arise in the negotiation of the contracts concerned.’

When asked about their latest performances in Madrid, the firm’s partner, Verónica Meana, points our that: ‘We have recently seen in the office a notable increase in the number of cases that are resolved in institutional arbitration in these matters, either under CIAM or ICC rules, compared to the percentage of cases that go to court, which is still higher. This increase, although independent, runs parallel to the firm’s involvement in the Maritime Law working group within the Spanish Maritime Law Association in collaborating with CIAM, in an effort to promote maritime arbitration in Spain as an efficient and quality alternative means of dispute resolution.’

AIYON’s involvement in the teaching and preparation of the new generations is part of its hallmark, a fact that Verónica wants to highlight: ‘On the other hand, form Madrid, as from the rest of our offices, we continue to contribute to the teaching of maritime law. In my case, participating as a lecturer in the Master’s degree of both the IME (Spanish Maritime Institute) and the ISDE (Higher Institute of Law and Economics) in the subjects of maritime law and land transport.’

‘In Aiyon we know what it means to be at the side of both maritime and land carriers on a daily basis’, says Enrique Ortiz, partner of the Cadiz office. ‘And we know what it is like to be there for them both in normal circumstances and in urgent situations that require quick action (such as refusals of delivery by receivers, accidents, blocking of the means of transport by the authorities, etc.). What’s more, in exceptional circumstances, such as during the Covid confinement period or during the road transport stoppages and strikes that took place throughout the country between March and April 2022, our customers have always been able to counts on us.’

In fact, the situation in times of strikes and stoppages in the transport sector was not easy for the companies dedicated to land transport, and many of them, due to the convulsions of the time, even suffered damage to their vehicles caused by a group of people who, in favour of the strike during those dates, ‘took it’, in an absolutely vehement manner, against the vehicles in question. In relation to these events, which occurred to a significant number of road haulage companies and vehicles, Enrique can confirm that AIYON has recently managed to obtain, for one of its clients, a favourable ruling in the first instance, subject to appeal, against the Insurance Compensation Consortium, ensuring that concepts such as ‘riot’ and ‘extraordinary risk’ are not emptied of content, thereby rendering ineffective the coverage of claims that correspond to the Insurance Compensation Consortium. Let us not forget that the Consortium collects part of the premiums that insured hauliers pay to their insurance companies.

Asked about the great activity of the Port of Algeciras, our partner in the location, José Domínguez, tells us: ‘The port of Algeciras occupies a pre-eminent position within the Spanish port system. From our office in Algeciras, we provide ‘dockside’ assistance to shipping companies that provide passenger and goods transport services, both containers and roll-on/roll-off cargo in the Strait of Gibraltar, constantly advising not only in the day-to-day handling of all types of cargo and passengers claims, but also in the planning and management phases of the shipping companies to face challenges such as those of the so-called Operation Crossing the Strait (OPE). To this end, we regularly advise on charterparties, slot charters, shipbuilding and ship repair contracts, ancillary contracts and agreements such as stevedoring, confinement, etc. This is a part of the business that I particularly enjoy, as my background as a merchant seafarer is of great help to our clients, as I speak the same language as they do.’

Another of the most important traffics of Algeciras is the supply of fuel to ships, the so-called bunkering. Domínguez indicates in this respect that: ‘Algeciras is one of the most important bunkering ports in the Mediterranean. The maritime traffic through the Strait of Gibraltar, together with the magnificent anchorage of the port, make our port especially attractive for this type of operations. The figures that are handled are very relevant, close to 350,000 tons of oil products to ships, at a rate of approximately 200 ships supplied per month by a fleet of more than 15 barges of different sizes.’

For her part, Zuberoa Elorriaga, AIYON partner in Bilbao, points out that, in their almost 10 years as active partners, the common effort and trajectory has brought them together, allowing them to learn from each other: ‘Together with the rest of the firm’s staff, we form a close-knit team that encourages cooperation between offices and lawyers. It is not an easy sector as we face different challenges every day, with often complex cases and different actors involved, so the best way to work is to support each other and share experiences, which will always result in a better service for our clients.’

Finally, Zuberoa makes special mention of the continuous learning that the firm’s team is committed to pursuing, proof of which is the Postgraduate Course in Aeronautics and Space Law at the Faculty of Law (ICADE) of the Universidad Pontificia de Comillas, which she completed in 2021, opening up new areas of activity for the firm.

Listening to its partners, it is clear that in Aiyon Abogados they face this first decade of work and common effort as the beginning of a long and productive professional career looking to the future with optimism.

Read the article…

Complaints to Spanish State Aviation Safety Agency (AESA), an Option for Air Transport Users

Further to our post Order TMA/201/2022, of 14 March: New procedure for the settlement of disputes in favour of air transport users we must now refer to Order TMA/469/2023 of 17 April accrediting the Spanish Aviation Safety Agency (AESA) as an alternative dispute resolution entity in the field of air transport.

In our previous post we already anticipated that AESA had to obtain such accreditation to provide the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) service to air transport users: ‘The procedure shall apply to incidents occurring after the first day of the month following publication in the ‘Boletín Oficial del Estado’. Order TMA/469/2023 having been published in the BOE of 10 May 2023, it will apply from 2 June 2023.

To activate this procedure, the first step is always to make a prior complaint to the airline and try to reach an amicable agreement with them. This first contact is expressly referred to in Article 6 of Order TMA/201/2022 of 14 March, as a step prior to initiating the alternative dispute resolution procedure before AESA. From the day of the incident, the user has 5 years to complain, and the airline should resolve the complaint within 1 month. If no reply is received or if the reply is not satisfactory, the affected person has 1 year from the date of the previous complaint to the airline to start the complaint procedure before AESA.

To do so, users must fill in a form provided by the Agency, adding the required documents. It is not until all the documents are available that the 90 calendar day deadline for AESA to resolve the complaint begins. However, this is also the beginning of the 21-day period within which to reject the complaint, without prejudice to the possible review to be requested at a later date by the interested party.

If the complaint is accepted, the airline or airport operator complained of shall be heard, as appropriate, and the complaint and documentation submitted by the affected party shall be forwarded to it. This is how a process of allegations and evidence is initiated between the parties, in which the Agency intervenes, and which will at all times inform the parties of their rights via its website.

The AESA Director will decide by means of a reasoned decision and will determine the measures to be applied in the case in question. As we have already reported, this decision will be binding on the carrier concerned, unlike before 2 June 2023. In principle, therefore, the carrier is obliged to comply with the decision and to send the Agency proof of compliance as soon as the decision is made. They must also inform the Agency whether they have contested the decision, which will be dealt with in the appropriate procedural area.

Legal claims by the passenger or the affected party, either as a challenge or as an original claim, are in practice channelled through oral proceedings due to their limited amount. However, should this scenario arise, other possible options to pursue financial claims, such as payment order proceedings, will have to be considered.

This regulation is a good proposal which, in addition to protecting passengers in complying with this regulation, aims to relieve the commercial courts of small claims, which could be resolved at an administrative level, with the help of AESA.

The long-term success of this procedure will depend on the real commitment of the parties to respect the Agency’s decisions, as in many cases airlines do not comply with the decision voluntarily and there is no subsequent follow-up of the case by AESA, so that consumers may decide to go directly ‘to court’, which means that the ultimate aim of this dispute resolution procedure would not have the intended effect.