What it is
Faster recovery of illegally occupied homes
It is a members’ bill. Introduced by parliamentary groups, the Senate, regional governments or citizens. It was introduced on 20 January 2017. Introduced by: Grupo Parlamentario Mixto.
Official title: Private member's bill amending Law 1/2000, of 7 January, on Civil Procedure, regarding the illegal occupation of dwellings.
Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 122/000061· updated 11 Nov
Automatic summary, not yet reviewed
- The bill would allow individuals who own or legitimately possess a home, nonprofit entities entitled to possess it, and public entities owning social housing to request the immediate recovery of full possession when deprived of it without their consent.
- The lawsuit could be filed against unknown occupants of the home, without identifying them in advance, and the document proving the right to possess it must be attached.
- If the plaintiff requests immediate delivery, occupants would have five days to provide a document justifying their situation. If they do not, and the plaintiff's document is sufficient, the court would order immediate delivery of the home, with no appeal possible against that decision.
- If defendants do not answer the lawsuit, a judgment would be issued immediately, and a favorable judgment could be enforced without waiting the twenty days required under the general rule.
- When an eviction date is set for an occupied home, or occupants are identified, social services would be notified, with the occupants' consent, so they can act in cases of vulnerability. Public administrations would have to coordinate and create registries of available social housing.
- The entry into force of the Civil Registry Law would be postponed until June 30, 2020, and this bill would enter into force twenty days after its publication in the Official State Gazette.
Who it affects
- Individual homeowners: Could request the immediate recovery of their home when occupied without their consent.
- Nonprofit and public entities with social housing: Would have a fast legal channel to recover social housing units that are occupied.
- Illegal occupants of homes: Would have five days to justify their situation and could be evicted immediately if they do not.
- Social services and public administrations: Would receive notices of evictions and vulnerable situations and would have to coordinate their response.
Words worth knowing
- Lanzamiento (eviction)
- A court order to leave the home and remove the belongings inside it.
- Título (title document)
- A document proving the right to possess something, such as a deed or a contract.
- Tutela sumaria (summary protection)
- Fast and simple court protection, without a full trial.
- Vacatio
- The period between the approval of a law and its entry into force.
It summarizes the text passed by the committee. It is written by artificial intelligence and may contain mistakes: the official text is what counts. Read the official text · How we make summaries
Where it stands
How far did it get?
It took 7 of 7 steps. It reached BOE, and today it is passed.
- Introduced20 January 2017Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
- Admitted26 January 2017The Bureau of the Congreso accepts it and, for a members’ bill, the plenary decides whether to consider it.
- Amendments27 March 2017Groups propose changes.
- Committee20 September 2017A committee goes through the text in detail.
- Plenaryno dateAll 350 deputies vote.
- Senate24 April 2018The Senate can pass it, amend it or veto it.
- BOE6 June 2018It is published in the Official State Gazette (BOE) and comes into force.
See the 12 official steps on a timeline
14 March 2017
How did the plenary vote?
Voted on: Private member's bill from the Mixed Parliamentary Group amending Law 1/2000, of January 7, on Civil Procedure, regulating a specific procedure to guarantee the possession of dwellings owned by natural persons and to ensure the availability of dwellings held by social entities and public administrations for social rental.
Source: Congreso de los Diputados, vote 1 of sitting 35· updated 10 Nov
Each dot is a seat. Tap one, or use the arrow keys, to see who it is.
Your province
How did the deputies from your province vote?
And your senators: the Senate does not link its votes to this law in its open data, so we cannot put them side by side here.
Or see how most of each province voted
- A Coruña Tie 4 yes · 4 no
- Albacete Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Alicante/Alacant More votes in favour 7 yes · 5 no
- Almería More votes in favour 4 yes · 2 no
- Araba/Álava Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Asturias Tie 4 yes · 4 no
- Ávila More votes in favour 2 yes · 1 no
- Badajoz Tie 3 yes · 3 no
- Barcelona More votes against 9 yes · 17 no
- Bizkaia More votes against 3 yes · 5 no
- Burgos Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Cáceres Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Cádiz More votes against 4 yes · 5 no
- Cantabria More votes in favour 3 yes · 2 no
- Castellón/Castelló More votes in favour 3 yes · 1 no
- Ceuta More votes in favour 1 yes · 0 no
- Ciudad Real More votes in favour 3 yes · 2 no
- Córdoba Tie 3 yes · 3 no
- Cuenca More votes in favour 2 yes · 1 no
- Gipuzkoa More votes against 2 yes · 4 no
- Girona More votes against 2 yes · 3 no
- Granada More votes in favour 4 yes · 3 no
- Guadalajara More votes in favour 2 yes · 1 no
- Huelva More votes against 1 yes · 3 no
- Huesca More votes against 1 yes · 2 no
- Illes Balears Tie 4 yes · 4 no
- Jaén More votes against 2 yes · 3 no
- La Rioja Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Las Palmas Tie 4 yes · 4 no
- León Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Lleida Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Lugo Tie 2 yes · 2 no
- Madrid More votes in favour 19 yes · 14 no
- Málaga More votes in favour 6 yes · 5 no
- Melilla More votes in favour 1 yes · 0 no
- Murcia More votes in favour 7 yes · 3 no
- Navarra More votes against 2 yes · 3 no
- Ourense More votes in favour 3 yes · 1 no
- Palencia More votes in favour 2 yes · 1 no
- Pontevedra Tie 3 yes · 3 no
- Salamanca More votes in favour 3 yes · 1 no
- Santa Cruz de Tenerife More votes in favour 4 yes · 3 no
- Segovia More votes in favour 2 yes · 1 no
- Sevilla More votes against 5 yes · 7 no
- Soria Tie 1 yes · 1 no
- Tarragona Tie 3 yes · 3 no
- Teruel More votes in favour 2 yes · 1 no
- Toledo Tie 3 yes · 3 no
- Valencia/València Tie 8 yes · 8 no
- Valladolid More votes in favour 3 yes · 2 no
- Zamora More votes in favour 2 yes · 1 no
- Zaragoza More votes in favour 4 yes · 3 no
More details: how each group and each province voted
The groups
Who voted in favour and who against?
In favour, most of Vasco (EAJ-PNV), Mixto, Ciudadanos and Popular en el Congreso. Against, most of Socialista, Gcup-ec-em and GER. 7 deputies voted differently from their group.
By province: in 23 most voted in favour; in 10, against.
Coloured by how most of each province’s deputies voted.
- In favour: 23
- Against: 10
- Tie: 19
| Group | Seats | How it voted |
|---|---|---|
| Socialista | 84 | 84 against |
| Vasco (EAJ-PNV) | 5 | 5 in favour |
| Mixto | 19 | 10 in favour · 7 against · 2 did not vote |
| Ciudadanos | 32 | 31 in favour · 1 did not vote |
| Gcup-ec-em | 67 | 63 against · 4 did not vote |
| GER | 9 | 8 against · 1 did not vote |
| Popular en el Congreso | 134 | 130 in favour · 4 did not vote |
What happens next
What happens now?
It is law, or will be once published in the BOE. It comes into force on the date its own text sets.
The same initiative in the other chamber:
Sources
Where does all this come from?
- Congreso de los Diputados, file 122/000061
Official title, type, author, dates and stage.
Retrieved 11 November 2026
- Congreso de los Diputados, vote 1 of sitting 35
The count and every seat’s vote.
Retrieved 10 November 2026
- The data comes from the open files of the Congreso, the Senate and the BOE, unaltered.
- Each deputy’s province is the one of their seat on the day of the vote.
- We only say “passed” or “rejected” when the majority needed is certain; otherwise we say which side had more votes.