The Contentious Administrative Court number 2 of Palma has endorsed the closure of the DC-10 entertainment venue decreed by the City of San José in 2008 due to “a serious violation of excess capacity”
As reported by the City of San José through a statement, a final judgment of the nº2 Court of Palma supports the closure of the DC-10 premises in 2008 decreed by the Consistory. This ruling, which is firm, "also reduces the initial fine of 300.000 euros to 60.000, when the judges understand the sanctioning resolution should have been motivated by the imposition of a fine in the medium degree instead of the minimum stipulated by law."
With this sentence, according to the San José City Council, a performance of the council is endorsed that it considers was "forceful and courageous at the time". The Consistory has recalled that the events, which caused the closure of the DC-10 for a period of one year, "go back to the month of August of 2007, when agents of the Local Police of Sant Josep carried out an inspection to the premises and detected that there were some 400 people on the terrace and 150 inside the premises".
As the City Council explains, the DC-10 has coffee concert category and a maximum capacity of 65 people inside. Although the appellant alleges that the terrace has capacity for 173 more people, the judgment indicates that this capacity would also have been clearly exceeded, since the agents speak of 400 people only outside the premises. The ruling considers that the closure for a period of one year is a reasonable measure, since the law provides up to a maximum of 3 years, he adds.
The Consistory explained that the appellant had also alleged defects that could nullify the administrative file and ensured that the hearing process was omitted, in addition to violating the principle of presumption of innocence, the impossibility of carrying out tests and that two files of proceedings were processed. Simultaneously for the same facts.
The court has rejected all these arguments and has upheld the correct handling of the sanctioning file.
On the other hand, the City recalled that the DC-10 did not present evidence that could prove that the capacity was not exceeded, such as recordings of security cameras.
