TSJB Charges the Council of Pollensa in Noise Pollution Case

In a ruling handed down on May 31, the Superior Court of Justice of the Balearic Islands (TSJB) has ordered that the Pollensa Town Council compensate two residents of Puerto Pollensa with €38,360 + legal interest. The court ruled that the council did not take any action against a bar,  after its neighbours reported noise pollution on multiple occasions. It resulted in a situation that caused the residents serious health problems.

This ruling from the TSJB, overturns one made by the contentious-administrative court that previously ruled in favour of both the Council and the restaurant. Turning this around, the TSJB declares that the municipal institution “has injured the fundamental rights” of the residents and orders the “immediate suspension” of the source of the restaurant’s noise until the property “can prove” that the musical entertainment “is subject to scrupulous compliance with the law.”

The neighbours appealed this initial decision saying that the assessment of the sonometric tests were insufficient and even left out one report. Furthermore, the appellants argued that the ruling did not analyse other important evidence such as image and sound recordings, expert reports on the effects on health or the reports and minutes drawn up by the Local Police.

The Public Ministry also joined the neighbours’ appeal and considered that there was an “erroneous assessment of the evidence.” The Prosecutor explained that in response to all the complaints made “the Council did not adopt any measure, did not make any technical measurement” and that it “only reacted with the presentation of this procedure by carrying out some inspections starting in April 2023, but without any sound meter.”

The TSJB concluded that the Council “had the inexcusable obligation to act and do so efficiently, verifying the veracity of these complaints and the reality or not of the noise pollution of which the appellants complained” because this “can cause damage to people’s health and prevent rest and tranquility in their own home”, regardless of whether it is a first or second residence (as alleged by the company). “What matters and must be taken into account is the noise that is endured in a specific inhabited home, where the resident has the full right to enjoy his privacy and his inviolability,” the ruling states.

The two affected neighbours filed twenty complaints between 2020 and 2021 to report the noise from the bar-restaurant located next to their residence. However, the Council “did not carry out any sonometric measurements” because, among other things, “it did not have an approved sonometric device for perform measurements.”

The ruling considers it proven that the appellants suffered psychological disorders caused by “noise pollution.” One of them suffers from an adjustment disorder while the other suffers from major depressive disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder from having endured the noise for 29 months.