Litigation and international arbitration analysis and projections for 2026 in Spain
January 2026
As in previous years, we set out our views on the main developments and trends expected to shape litigation and international arbitration in Spain in 2026.
2. International arbitration and litigation
3. Digital sector. Industrial and intellectual property and unfair competition
4. Insolvency and restructuring
5. Consumer law and general terms and conditions. Collective actions
6. Damages arising from unfair competition
1. General litigation
The major changes to civil litigation in 2025 were driven by the effects of Basic Law 1/2025, which introduced mandatory alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and reform of the justice system. In addition, the use of litigation funding has gradually increased. More steps are being taken towards new forms of litigation, such as: ESG and cybersecurity.
- Litigation in Spain in 2025 was marked by the enactment and entry into force in April of Basic Law 1/2025 of 2 January to improve the efficiency of the justice system (“Basic Law 1/2025”).
- The first major change Basic Law 1/2025 introduced was a requirement that ADR be mandatorily used for civil law cases to be admissible. This measure has received mixed reactions from the legal community and has had a significant impact on civil litigation practice in 2025, which will continue into 2026. On the one hand, it may have increased the number of disputes that are resolved out of court before a lawsuit is filed. On the other hand, however, it has also slowed down the processing of cases that are brought to court. The law also leaves open numerous questions of interpretation, which are gradually being resolved through rulings and interpretative criteria published by judges, courts and court clerks (Letrados de la Administración de Justicia). Nevertheless, uncertainty and disparity remain, which we trust will be resolved in 2026.
- Basic Law 1/2025 has also reformed the justice system, mainly by creating courts of first instance to replace single-judge courts. This represents a substantial organisational change in how judicial bodies are organised, directly impacting the legal actions of parties and professionals. The new structure was introduced gradually in 2025, starting with the smaller judicial districts. In some cases, practical difficulties and delays in the processing of cases have occurred, and these could increase in larger districts where reorganising is more complicated. This is expected to affect the organisation and timing of judicial proceedings in 2026, but incidents are expected to decrease as the year progresses.
- Although they have been in place for several years, the activity of litigation financing funds has recently increased. We believe that this trend will consolidate in 2026. Both parties and lawyers are becoming increasingly aware of these operators, especially when initiating legal proceedings with a favourable economic outlook but that involve high costs.
- From a material point of view, some litigation areas that have been analysed for several years are finally making their way to court, and are likely to become more prevalent in the near future. These include litigation relating to ESG issues and personal data breaches. At the same time, lawsuits for damages arising from unfair competition have become a well-established reality in Spain. Finally, the intense transactional activity by private equity funds and other investors in recent months may also lead to an increase in contractual and corporate disputes.
2. Arbitration and international litigation
The international arbitration landscape in 2026 will be shaped by significant changes that will affect arbitration practice.
- We anticipate an increase in disputes in the energy, construction and investment sectors, driven by three converging factors: growing geopolitical tensions, including armed conflicts and the unilateral use of force by States affecting strategic sectors; constantly evolving regulatory frameworks; and persistent global economic uncertainty. In many cases, arbitration will be the most appropriate mechanism to resolve these disputes. The technical and legal complexity of these disputes will result in longer and more costly arbitration proceedings.
- This trend will converge with a growing demand for expedited procedures, which have already been implemented by the main international arbitration institutions for cases that allow for more agile processing without compromising procedural fairness.
- Madrid will continue to strengthen its position as a seat for resolving disputes between companies in Europe, Asia and Latin America. This growth is underpinned by the increasingly important role of CIAM-CIAR and the strength of its arbitration community. The ICCA Congress in Madrid in 2026 will confirm this trend, establishing Spain’s capital city as a leading international arbitration hub.
- Spanish is set to consolidate its position as the preferred language for international arbitration, reflecting the significant presence of Spanish and Latin American companies in the energy and construction sectors.
3. Digital sector. Industrial and intellectual property and unfair competition
Litigation activity is expected to increase in the digital and entertainment platform sector, with significant cases involving unfair competition and other anti-competitive practices, intellectual property, trademarks and audiovisual rights.
- In the audiovisual and entertainment sector, 2025 saw an increase in litigation relating to the marketing and exploitation of formats, audiovisual rights, trademark rights, intellectual property rights and image rights over events (sporting events and public performances in general) and fictional content. This trend is expected to continue in 2026.
- In the field of intellectual property, civil courts will continue to play a more prominent role in defining the legal criteria and limits of the fees charged by collective management organisations (CMOs), especially in light of these entities’ dominant position and the potential for anti-competitive practices in their negotiation processes and fee requirements across various sectors. Conversely, case law clarifying the criteria for distinguishing between copyright and industrial designs (e.g. CJEU 4-XII-2025, cases C-580/23 and C-795/23) could impact disputes between creators and companies that own the rights to specific functional creations in various sectors.
- Consultations and disputes relating to personal data breaches will continue in their various forms (prevention, response and management of procedures). Damages claims for breaches of data regulations could become more prevalent, in line with nearby jurisdictions. Similarly, possible infringements of data protection, consumer protection or other regulations could encourage unfair competition actions. As a result, litigation over unfair commercial practices could increase in various sectors of the consumer goods and services sector, including cases involving misleading environmental claims (greenwashing).
- There was also an increase in litigation for breach of confidentiality and unlawful poaching of employees and customers in 2025, which is consistent with the greater levels of competition among market operators, particularly, although not exclusively, due to technological advances.
- Uncertainty regarding the classification of generative artificial intelligence (AI) training systems in intellectual property legislation and, specifically, regarding the application of text and data mining limits or aspects of applicable law and jurisdiction, will remain at the national, European and international level. In this regard, the Court of Justice of the European Union’s (“CJEU”) ruling in case C-250/25 on the use of press publications in the training and output of generative AI tools will be of particular interest.
4. Insolvency and restructuring
The consolidation of preventive restructuring frameworks is expected to occur at the expense of insolvency proceedings. A new insolvency directive will be published.
- In the area of restructuring and insolvency, we anticipate that the number of restructuring operations will continue to increase in 2026. This growth will be driven by the major regulatory changes brought about by Law 16/2022 of 5 September, which reformed the revised text of the Insolvency Law. As mentioned, preventive restructuring frameworks are increasingly being implemented, although we are beginning to see greater judicial control over their budgets and more requests for insolvency plans to be approved with the option to challenge them. We expect case law to develop on the grey areas, bringing legal certainty and confidence and consequently continuing to drive this type of action.
- In this regard, it is becoming clear that insolvency proceedings are now largely confined to the most severe cases of insolvency, although they continue to be a successful way of selling pre-packaged production units.
- When the successive accounting moratoriums previously in place appeared to have come to an end, Royal Decree-Law 16/2025 of 23 December once again extended them. As a result, losses incurred in the 2020 and 2021 financial years are excluded from the calculation – until the close of the financial year commencing in 2026 – for the purposes of determining whether a company is subject to mandatory dissolution due to losses. This measure is still pending ratification by the Congress of Deputies.
- 2026 will be an important year because the recently approved Second Insolvency Directive is due to be published. Following this, Member States will have two years to transpose it into their domestic law. In the meantime, the Directive will serve as a valuable interpretative tool.
5. Consumer litigation and general terms and conditions. Collective actions.
Uncertainty remains regarding future regulations on collective actions (often referred to as “class actions” in the US). A high level of individual litigation is still prevalent in various economic sectors, and other forms of collective litigation are being established.
- Spain is one of the few EU countries that has not yet transposed Directive (EU) 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and of the Council on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers. In March 2025, the Draft Law on Collective Actionswas published, which is virtually identical to the regulation that was removed from the Draft Basic Law on measures to reform the efficiency of the justice system at the end of 2024. Since its publication, the period for submitting amendments has been repeatedly extended. Due to the current standstill in legislative activity, it is uncertain whether the bill will ultimately be passed, and if so, on what terms. This includes whether it will adopt an opt-in or opt-out system and whether third-party litigation funding will be restricted in any way.
- Despite this situation, collective actions based on consumer law and unfair competition are still taking place in Spain (mainly injunctions), although in lower volumes and with less impact than would have been the case had the bill been passed.
- The absence of new regulations on collective actions has led to the rise of alternative forms of collective litigation, such as transferring legal actions to third-party-funded special purpose vehicles. This has been particularly apparent in litigation for damages due to unfair competition or consumer association-based litigation (which effectively involves a subjective joinder of individual cases).
- At the individual level, consumer litigation will continue in various sectors. In the financial sector, lawsuits concerning the sale of insurance (or other products) linked to loans, commissions, consumer loans and credit, and creditworthiness assessments are likely to continue. In the housing sector, there has been an increase in lawsuits seeking the annulment of clauses in rental contracts, prompting the Ministry of Consumer Affairs to initiate disciplinary proceedings. Consumer litigation is also expected to grow in the digital sector, the transport sector (where the Supreme Court ruled on two collective actions last year against an airline and a motorway concessionaire), telecommunications, and the leisure and entertainment sectors.
- From a regulatory perspective, the law on customer service is expected to be approved. This will regulate the operation of this service and the information that must be provided to consumers about it. Likewise, the new directive on credit agreements for consumers should be transposed. This extends information and transparency obligations and introduces other borrower protection measures. The transposition deadline was 20 November 2025, and its provisions will become applicable as of 20 November 2026.
6. Damages arising from anti-competitive conduct
The CJEU settled the debate on limitation periods for damages claims arising from national penalty decisions in favour of claimants. While competition litigation is set to rise in 2026, it continues to be a challenging process for those involved.
- It has been eight years now since the introduction of Directive 2014/104/EU on damages claims for competition law infringements, which substantially modified, strengthened and harmonised the regime applicable to claims for damages arising from infringements of competition law. Following the initial surge in civil litigation prompted by the European Commission’s Decision of 19 July 2016, which penalised the anti-competitive conduct of truck manufacturers, Spanish courts have continued to hear numerous cases in this area. Far from abating, lawsuits based on sanctioning decisions by national authorities have significantly increased in recent years, notably in cases involving manufacturers of envelopes, adult incontinence products, cars, cables, and milk purchasers. Similarly, entities sanctioned by the European Commission, such as certain Euribor panel banks, have been the focal point of compensation claims. This upward trend is expected to continue in 2026.
- In its judgment of 4 September 2025 in case C-21/24 (Nissan Iberia, S.A.), the CJEU resolved the recent debate that has divided judicial practice in Spain, concluding that, as long as the decision of the national competition authority is not final, the injured party will not have all the information needed to bring a follow-on action for damages. Consequently, actions brought within the statutory limitation period, after the sanctioning decision has become final, would not be time-barred. Therefore, the CJEU enables individuals affected by an anti-competitive offence to delay their claim for damages until five years after the national penalty decision has become final.
- Judgments 889/2025 and 971/2025 of 5 and 17 June of the First Chamber of the Supreme Court, handed down in the envelope cartel case, confirmed the application of the court’s discretionary assessment of damages at 20% of the purchase price of the envelopes. The Supreme Court resorted to the court’s discretionary assessment of damages as a “Solomonic solution” when neither party can present a counterfactual scenario. In this context, the litigants, with the input of their economic experts, must present a reasonable and sufficiently substantiated estimate of the additional cost (or prove that there was none). If the court finds that neither party has managed to quantify the damage (or prove that there was none), it will most likely either dismiss the claim on the grounds of insufficient evidence or apply to the discretionary damages assessment.
- Finally, despite delays in incorporating the Directive on representative actions into Spanish law, it is worth noting that claims for compensation arising from anti-competitive practices are evolving into new forms of litigation. Two approaches in particular stand out: first, initiatives by consumer associations seeking to classify anti-competitive behaviour-related damage as falling within the category of homogeneous rights of individuals (i.e. a group of consumers whose underlying individual cases have factual and legal issues in common), and second, the actions of international litigation funds specialising in acquiring the compensation rights from thousands of injured parties through credit assignment agreements.
7. Product liability
The Directive on liability for damage caused by defective products will bring about significant changes to litigation in this area.
- On 18 November 2024, Directive (EU) 2024/2853 of the European Parliament and of the Council on liability for defective products was published. This directive will repeal the current European and national regulations on 9 December 2026 and amend the legal regime applicable to claims for damages caused by defective products.
- The implications of this Directive are significant: the scope of application has been extended to include new products, such as digital services (including computer programs, operating systems, AI systems and digitally produced files, as well as related services); new economic operators, such as those responsible for the programming, development and updating of those digital services, as well as authorised representatives of the manufacturer, logistics service providers or online platform providers, under certain circumstances, may be held liable; the burden of proof has been clarified to include the possibility of requesting the disclosure of specific evidence and establishing a regime of presumptions of defect and causality; the types of damages covered have been increased to include, within bodily injury, medically certified psychological damage, as well as the destruction of data or moral damages; and the liability periods have been extended to 25 years for latent damage.
- The Directive will apply to all products placed on the market or put into service after 9 December 2026, which is also the deadline by which Member States must have transposed the Directive into their national legislation.
- It is worth noting that the Directive appears to aim for maximum harmonisation in this area, leaving little room for Member States to maintain or introduce provisions that are more or less stringent than those set out in the Directive in order to achieve a different level of protection.
8. European litigation
Important rulings are expected in 2026 from the CJEU and the General Court, among others, on infringements affecting the Union’s financial interests, copyright and related rights in the information society, the rule of law, indirect taxation, arbitration and merger control.
- In case C-280/25, Lin II, the Romanian High Court again referred questions to the CJEU regarding its previous ruling of 24 July 2023 (case C-107/23 PPU, Lin I). The questions concerned the obligation to disapply national rules or case law on the limitation period for tax offences where these could lead to systemic risks of impunity for infringements affecting the Union’s financial interests. Specifically, the CJEU has been asked to clarify the minimum threshold for considering offences against the Union’s financial interests to be serious and to confirm the obligation to disapply national standards on the principle of more favourable criminal law under the Lin I case law even if this means disregarding the fact that (i) a higher-ranking constitutional principle was violated, (ii) the limitation period expired before the Lin I judgment was handed down, (iii) the level of protection of fundamental rights would not be equivalent to that set out in Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), or (iv) this would be done without specific criteria for assessing systemic risk of impunity in advance.
- Case C-590/23, Pelham, concerns a preliminary ruling requested by the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH), which raised questions of principle regarding Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright and related rights in the information society. Specifically, the BGH asked whether “sampling” can be considered to fall within the exception for use for pastiche purposes, and, if not, whether this constitutes an undue restriction on the freedom of art enshrined in Article 13 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The question arose in the context of an ongoing dispute over the use of a two-second samplefrom an electronic song in a song produced by a music production company.
- Among the various preliminary rulings requested by Spanish courts, the judgments in cases C-523/24, Sociedad Civil Catalana and C-666/24, Associació Catalana de Víctimes d'Organitzacions Terroristes (ACVOT) are worth highlighting. These cases were submitted by the Court of Auditors and the National High Court, respectively, in relation to various aspects of Basic Law 1/2024 on amnesty. Conversely, case C-515/24, Randstad España, was submitted by the Supreme Court in relation to the limitations on the right to deduct VAT for customer services for business purposes and case C-244/25, Cabify España was submitted by the High Court of Justice of Madrid in relation to a public policy judicial review in an arbitration award for infringement of competition law rules.
- Among the judgments expected from the General Court, the following is particularly noteworthy: case T-1139/23 Booking, which is an annulment action concerning the Commission’s 25 September 2023 decision to prohibit Booking’s acquisition of eTraveli. This is the eleventh time in the last decade that the European Commission has prohibited a concentration.
9. ESG
The CS3D Directive is expected to be revised, leading to an increase in environmental liability proceedings and enhanced scrutiny over environmental claims.
- The Council and the European Parliament have agreed on a revised text of Directive (EU) 2024/1760 of the European Parliament and of the Council on corporate sustainability due diligence (CS3D) within the framework of Omnibus Package I. The aim is to simplify the regulations and reduce the administrative burden on companies. The main amendments include: (i) reducing the subjective scope of application by raising the turnover threshold (EUR 1.5 billion) and the number of employees (5,000); (ii) simplifying the process for detecting and assessing adverse impacts, particularly with regard to business partners; (iii) removing the harmonised civil liability regime for damage caused to third parties as a result of breaches of the CS3D; and (iv) postponing its application to companies until 26 July 2029.
- Official data from the Ministry for Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge’s Environment Advisory Council show an increase in the number of environmental liability proceedings brought by environmental organisations and individuals against private operators under Law 26/2007 of 23 October on environmental liability. In light of this trend, areas of growing regulatory interest such as PFAS, persistent waste from the chemical and cosmetics industry, and microplastics should be given careful consideration.
- Environmental claims made by companies are subject to increasingly rigorous control. Directive (EU) 2024/825 of the European Parliament and of the Council on greenwashing, which has not yet been transposed into Spanish law, establishes greater restrictions on the use of such claims, limiting generic statements and future commitments that are not backed by concrete evidence. While there is some regulatory uncertainty at the European level due to the lack of progress on the proposed directive on explicit environmental claims, the regulatory trend is clear: a move towards greater control over the use of these claims. In this context, environmental organisations have been lodging more complaints with the relevant consumer protection authorities, challenging environmental claims they deem misleading and urging the authorities to initiate sanctioning proceedings.
10. Energy
Litigation relating to wind farms in Galicia is expected to persist, following the High Court of Justice of Galicia’s decision to uphold numerous appeals. Close attention should be paid to the pending ruling by the Constitutional Court on the appeal lodged by the central government concerning the repowering framework. The opening of the 2026–31 regulatory period may usher in a new wave of litigation.
- Various Galician environmental and neighbourhood associations have systematically filed administrative and contentious-administrative appeals against the authorisation of wind farm projects, creating a highly contentious situation in the region. While this trend is also evident in other autonomous regions, Galicia stands out as the region where the High Court of Justice has granted a particularly significant number of interim suspensions of authorisations and upheld a substantial number of appeals.
- Supreme Court Ruling 317/2025 of 21 March affirmed that the processing of wind farms separately when they share evacuation infrastructure does not entail artificial project fragmentation for environmental assessment purposes. In its judgment of 1 August 2025 (case C-461/24), the CJEU validated the regulatory framework for public participation in environmental assessment procedures applied in Galicia, which the High Court of Justice had deemed to be contrary to EU law.
- However, Judgment 368/2025 of 27 October of the High Court of Justice of Galicia concerning the A Ruña III wind farm (Mazaricos, A Coruña), is the latest chapter in this “saga”. In this ruling, the High Court of Justice of Galicia does not question the State and regional regulatory framework for environmental assessment and public participation, but concludes that the environmental impact assessment for the wind farm and its evacuation infrastructure should have been carried out jointly.
- This ruling thus opens up a different path – focusing on the requirement for a joint assessment of the facility and its evacuation infrastructure – and leaves it to the Supreme Court to confirm or correct this criterion in a cassation appeal if one is finally lodged. The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling on this issue will undoubtedly have significant practical implications for project processing.
- On the other hand, Galician legislation (Law 5/2024 of 27 December on tax and administrative measures) obliges developers to repower wind farms that are more than 25 years old. Failure to do so will result in the revocation of the existing authorisation. This measure is expected to have a significant economic impact, affecting an estimated 98 wind farms in the coming years if it remains in force.
- The central government has challenged this regulation before the Constitutional Court, deeming it unconstitutional due to its violation of the order of competences and its encroachment on the fundamental state regulation of the electricity sector. Filing the appeal has automatically suspended the provisions in question. The Constitutional Court’s final decision will be crucial for the future of numerous wind farms in Galicia.
- Finally, the specific remuneration regime’s new 2026–31 regulatory period is expected to lead to litigation surrounding the updating of the remuneration parameters for renewable, cogeneration and waste facilities.
- In November 2025, the Ministry for Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge (MITECO) published the draft Order updating the remuneration parameters for standard facilities applicable to certain facilities producing electricity from renewable energy sources, cogeneration and waste for public consultation and information. This is for the regulatory period beginning on 1 January 2026.
- This type of order – which began with Order IET/1045/2014 on 16 June – has traditionally prompted a high volume of litigation. There have been numerous contentious-administrative appeals before the Supreme Court, which has even declared the partial invalidity of annexes and remuneration parameters. All signs point to the future Order for the 2026–31 period following this trend and resulting in new appeals in 2026.
