9th Chamber of the Provincial Court of Elche (Alicante) has sided with lawyers of Baño Leon Law Firm (Carlos Baño Leon) who had appeal to this High Court against a judgment from the Juzgado de 1ª Instancia No. 1 of Elche.
The clients of this Law Firm are the owners of a popular pub in Santa Pola (Alicante) and they had a lease contract with an important amusement machines company for the exploitation in their premises of various amusement machines of chance, in exchange for sharing the benefit of them.
In a certain moment there were disagreements between both parties and when the term of the contract was about to finish our client sent the other party a request not to extend the contract.
Afterwards and given that nobody went to take away the machines, our client decided to move the machine from its usual place where they were installed and operating to a bathroom where the clients could use it if they want to.
The company let some time pass and they went from time to time to collect the benefits and sometimes there was nothing because the machine was off.
After three years in this situation, the company made a requirement to our client in order to take away the machine, and our clients agreed to it. However after that they received a judicial claim where, among other things, they ask for a compensation for the benefits the company failed to obtain during that period of time and they calculate on the basis of an average of the benefits before the disagreements.
They multiplied this daily amount by the number of years which according to them have been not allowed to exploit the machine, either for being off or being hidden, which was a detriment for them, and the difference with the amount collected was the object of the claim. Therefore the amount of the claim was very important.
During the trial we thought that we had proved that indeed our client gave prior notice to the company about not prorogating the contract, so if the company had not taken away the machine they could not claim anything to our client, since the company was liable for it.
We defended and tried to prove that the client moved the machine to a toilet and this was a legal measure which was not revenge, and we tried to prove that, although smaller, there was still some amount collected.
The Judge of First Instance did not give us the reason and condemned our client what forced us to appeal the sentence before the Provincial Court of Elche that now has voted in favor of our lawyers and has revoked the sentence absolving our client of the claim of damages and of the condemn to have to pay a significant amount of money as compensation.
We are happy to have finally obtained a favorable sentence thus giving the reason to the criteria of defense that this law firm had developed.
We are at your disposal for any queries you wish to make and we hope that this article has been useful.