The Puerto Rico Court of Appeals recently ruled on a case involving a construction permit dispute in the municipality of Carolina. The court dismissed the appeal filed by Gilberto Torres Alejandros and others, stating that the appeal was premature due to a lack of proper notification. This decision affects the residents of the Ciudad Jardín urbanization who are involved in the construction project.
The case, officially titled Gilberto Torres Alejandros v. Municipio Autónomo De Carolina, Departamento De Permisos Urbanísticos (Ompu), P/C Carlos X. Rodríguez Ríos, et al., was filed under docket number TA2026RA00125. It centers on a construction permit that was initially granted but later revoked by the municipality. The court's decision highlights the importance of proper notification in administrative proceedings.
The dispute began when the Department of Urban Permits in Carolina granted a construction permit on April 14, 2025, for recreational spaces in the Ciudad Jardín area. However, on July 30, 2025, the department issued a denial of the permit, citing a lack of active legitimacy, meaning that not all property owners had authorized the construction. Following this, the department acknowledged an error in granting the permit and ordered the demolition of illegally constructed structures.
On March 21, 2026, Torres Alejandros and others filed a judicial review against the municipality, arguing that the revocation of the construction permit was erroneous and that the municipality had lost jurisdiction to revoke it after the designated time for appeal had passed. They also claimed that the revocation occurred without a proper hearing, violating their right to due process.
The court, led by Judge Álvarez Esnard, ruled that the appeal could not proceed because the notification of the revocation was defective. The court stated, "The notification defectively issued by the OMPU prevents the term from starting to run for an appeal, which affects the due process rights of the Recurrente." The court emphasized that the failure to include necessary legal warnings in the notification rendered the appeal premature.
The ruling underscores the significance of proper notification in administrative law. The court highlighted that without adequate notification, the jurisdiction to hear an appeal cannot be established. The court stated, "The defective notification deprives the forum of jurisdiction to address the matter in dispute." This ruling reinforces the principle that all parties must be properly informed of their rights and the procedures available to them.
Going forward, this decision may impact how municipalities handle construction permits and notifications. It emphasizes the need for compliance with notification requirements to ensure that parties can effectively exercise their rights in administrative proceedings. The ruling may also serve as a precedent for future cases involving similar issues of jurisdiction and notification in Puerto Rico.
As for what’s next, the parties in this case have the option to appeal the decision to a higher court, but details on whether they plan to do so were not available in the court filing. There may also be related cases pending that address similar issues of jurisdiction and notification in administrative law.