La Linea court reaffirms decision to close of Eastside reclamation case, prosecutor appeals

A judge in La Linea has issued a new court order confirming an earlier decision to shelve the Eastside reclamation case after rectifying a material error in an earlier ruling. 

Investigating magistrate Alberto Carlos Lloreda issued the order on July 28, following an earlier decision to end the case in January. 

The new ruling, seen by the Chronicle, corrects a material error while confirming the end of the judicial process due to a lack of evidence and the absence of permission from the Gibraltarian authorities to sample water quality. 

Spanish judicial sources confirmed that the Algeciras prosecutors’ office has already appealed the decision before the provincial court of Cadiz. 

In May 2025, the Algeciras prosecutors’ office sought to investigate whether the Eastside reclamation, using rubble, quarried rock and other materials, could constitute offences in Spanish law against land-use planning, natural resources and the environment in an area declared by Spain a Special Area of Conservation in 2012, the Eastern Strait, because it is a site of community importance within the EU’s Natura 2000 network. 

But the investigating magistrate found the prosecutor’s complaint and the reports submitted to the court “do not show evidence about any offence against environment or against flora or fauna.” 

The ruling adds that the “only investigating step” asked by the public prosecutors’ office is “to request an investigation into whether this offence is actually taking place in Spanish territorial waters.” 

The UK claims three miles of territorial sea around the Rock, but Spain does not recognise this and regards the waters as Spanish. 

‘DIPLOMATIC’ REASONS 

The UK and Gibraltar repeatedly make clear that the waters around the Rock are British, a position implicitly acknowledged in the court ruling. 

The investigating magistrate, for example, noted that the “Guardia Civil notes the impossibility of investigating the maritime area of [reclamation] works because the Gibraltar authorities do not permit it”. 

The document said that this has brought the investigation to “a standstill, not for procedural or judicial reasons, but diplomatic ones.” 

Regarding the operation at a quarry in La Utrera, from where part of the reclamation material was extracted, the document records that the Guardia Civil report had already specified that “all is legal and in order,” meaning that this line of investigation “is closed”. 

THE ERROR 

This second ruling was issued to rectify an error in the earlier decision, without altering its outcome. 

The court order explains that, following the unexpected absence of the civil servant in charge of the matter, her replacement “did not copy the paragraph containing the second legal grounds of the decision.” 

The error therefore omitted one of the legal grounds of the decision. The omitted reasoning “is essential” to justify the end of the legal case and is being taken into account in the appeal. 

The new ruling therefore “agrees to rectify” the material error and includes the omitted paragraph, while reaching the same outcome, namely the end of the case pending appeal. 

The order justifies closing the case on the grounds that “the commission of any offence does not appear to be sufficiently established from the investigations carried out.” 

“The provisional dismissal of the case should be ordered,” it says. 

It also states clearly that “there is no evidence of any act constituting the reported offence”.