Go back to News
NEWS
Real Estate M&A Ranking 2025
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo has consolidated its position among the most active law firms in real estate M&A transactions in Spain, according to TTR Data figures for the period from January to September 2025.
The firm ranks fifth by number of deals advised, with a total of 16 transactions. With this result, Gómez-Acebo & Pombo strengthens its leadership in transactional advisory services, taking part in some of the main deals in the market and consolidating a team specialised in mergers and acquisitions, finance, and real estate law.
The TTR Data report highlights the intensification of activity in the Spanish real estate market, driven by the recovery of investment in residential, logistics, and tourism assets, as well as by stable interest rates and the resumption of strategic deals following a more moderate start to the year.
Tipology
Acknowledgment
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
09 Feb, 2026
Notarial enforcement of pledges. Is Article 1872 of the Civil Code mandatory? In what sense?
The clause agreed upon must comply, for greater certainty, with the provisions of the new judicial enforcement procedure. It will be necessary to agree on an appraised value, which is not required in Article 1872 CC, because otherwise the award would be similar to a ‘forfeiture proviso’ (pactum commissorium), which the Civil Code neutralised with the drastic imposition of extinguishment of the debt in its entirety.
PUBLICATION
06 Feb, 2026
Automotive and Sustainable Mobility No. 29
Summary of legislative and jurisprudential developments relating to the automotive sector.
PUBLICATION
09 Jan, 2026
Continuing or permanent building damage and risk of no limitation period (Supreme Court (Civil Division) Judgment no. 1463/2025 of 21 October 2025)
With regard to actions under the Building (Unified Regulation) Act, the Supreme Court reaffirms that there is no continuing damage, but rather permanent damage. The solution is more efficient for all parties, as well as fairer. Also cheaper for the judicial system.
PUBLICATION
15 Dec, 2025
Direct harm due to de facto expulsion: Article 241 of the Companies Act (Supreme Court Judgment, First Chamber, 22 October 2025)
This paper analyses the subject matter scope of application of a ‘director liability to shareholder claim’ (claim for payment of damages filed by a shareholder against a company director). Although, as a general rule, shareholders cannot claim compensation for the harm caused to their share in a company’s estate, compensation for de facto expulsions or harm to liquidating dividends may be awarded through a director liability to shareholder claim.
PUBLICATION
11 Dec, 2025
Do consumer associations have universal locus standi? On the subject of two orders issued by the Provincial Court of Barcelona regarding the ‘car cartel’
The universal standing of consumer associations has no legal basis and creates perverse effects.
PUBLICATION
21 Nov, 2025
Compensation for loss of office ‘under market conditions’ provided for in articles of association
Judgment analyses claim filed by former CEO for non-payment of loss-of-office compensation provided for in articles of association (legal regime preceding the 2014 amendments to the Companies Act).
PUBLICATION
14 Nov, 2025
Automotive and Sustainable Mobility No. 28
Summary of legislative and jurisprudential developments relating to the automotive sector.
PUBLICATION
17 Oct, 2025
Impact on directors of company debts and penalties under a sector-specific rule
We analyse, in short, whether company payment contributions can be included in director liability (to company) claims.
PUBLICATION
01 Oct, 2025
Contractual termination by mutual abandonment not claimed by any party?
The risks of applying the doctrine according to which a contract is deemed withdrawn from if neither party to the same appears to want it. Not only is this solution likely to be inconsistent with the parties' claims, but it also wrongly rules out other civil law options the parties could pursue upon dismissal of the action for declaration of termination.