Go back to News
NEWS
The Supreme Court changes its criteria and now considers that late payment interest must be taxed | El Confidencial
The Supreme Court has changed its criteria and now considers that late payment interest must be taxed. This article, from El Confidencial, gathers the statements of our partner and senior associate of the Tax team, Javier Vinuesa and Rocío Arias, on this recent and surprising change of position by the Supreme Court.
Read full article.
Read full article.
Lawyer mentioned
Javier Vinuesa – Partner
Rocío Arias – Counsel
Press contact

Sandra Cuesta
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications

Sandra Cuesta
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
More information about
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
PUBLICATION
¡NEW!
Treatment within insolvency proceedings of claims arising from post-composition clawbacks
In Judgment no. 519/2025 of 1 April, the Supreme Court tackles the treatment to be given within insolvency proceedings to a claim acknowledged by way of court-ordered clawback (avoidance) prior to court approval of a composition.
PUBLICATION
6 days ago
Pharma & Healthcare No. 44
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.
PUBLICATION
30 Jun, 2025
Main changes introduced by RDL 7/2025 to the milestone system applied in the processing of renewable energy generation projects
Royal Decree-law 7/2025 introduces new regulations which modify and extend the milestone system applied in the processing of renewable energy generation projects
PUBLICATION
30 Jun, 2025
Main changes introduced by RDL 7/2025 regarding electricity storage projects
Royal Decree-law 7/2025 introduces regulatory changes to the processing and deployment of electricity storage projects
PUBLICATION
19 Jun, 2025
Company resolutions reached with invalid votes
Although Article 204(3)(d) places them on the same level, the erroneous counting of votes and the counting of invalid votes are very different, given that the latter requires judicial balancing.
PUBLICATION
13 Jun, 2025
Limits of the Unified Patent Court's long arm with regard to Spain (IV): the recognition and enforcement of court decisions
The Unified Patent Court has jurisdiction, in certain cases and within the limits set by the Brussels Ia Regulation and the Lugano Convention, to hear actions relating to classic European patents validated in States that are not party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court. Such decisions may be recognised and enforced in those other countries, but there are cases in which such recognition and enforcement will not be appropriate.
PUBLICATION
12 Jun, 2025
Limits of the Unified Patent Court's long arm with regard to Spain (III): applicable law
The Unified Patent Court has jurisdiction, in certain cases and within the limits laid down in the Brussels Ia Regulation and the Lugano Convention, to hear actions relating to classic European patents validated in States that are not contracting parties to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court. However, this does not mean that, when hearing such actions, the Court may apply the same rules as if the actions related to a unitary patent.
PUBLICATION
11 Jun, 2025
Limits of the Unified Patent Court's long arm with regard to Spain (II): the controversial judgment of the Court of Justice in the BSH/Electrolux case
This document sets out and criticises the doctrine established by the CJEU in its Judgment of 25 February 2025, C-339/22, BSH/Electrolux, ECLI:EU:C:2025:108. Although the dispute underlying the judgment was not brought before the UPC, the interpretation of the CJEU in the BSH/Electrolux judgment is equally applicable, since said court is equivalent to the national courts of the contracting states party to the UPC Agreement.
PUBLICATION
10 Jun, 2025
Limits of the Unified Patent Court's long arm with regard to Spain (I): international jurisdiction
Ever since coming into operation, there has been a tendency on the part of the Unified Patent Court to extend its jurisdiction to include patents that produce effects in States that are not party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (the ‘UPC Agreement’ or ‘Agreement’), as is the case of the Kingdom of Spain. This phenomenon is known in specialised circles as the court's ‘long arm’. However, although in certain cases the Unified Patent Court (the ‘UPC’ or ‘Court’) does indeed have such jurisdiction, this is only possible within strict limits, limits that do not seem to be taken into consideration in a consistent manner.