KLRA202300461
Tribunal De Apelaciones De Pue...Sep 26, 2023Background:
- Jeamaly Rivera Pérez applied for ministerial permits to operate a short‑term tourist lodging (hospedería) at 827 Calle Diana, Urbanización Villa Dos Pinos, San Juan; multiple prior applications were filed, amended, or archived between 2021–2023.
- The Asociación de Titulares de la Urbanización Villa Dos Pinos (the Association) sued Rivera Pérez in an injunction (SJ2021CV07063) alleging violation of private restrictive covenants recorded in Escritura Pública Núm. 57 (1952) and later sought to intervene in the OGPe permitting process.
- The OGPe, via an Authorized Professional (Ing. Francisco J. Rivera Torres), granted Permit Único 2023‑494595‑PU‑227588 (Alojamiento Suplementario a Corto Plazo — Hospedería) on July 31, 2023 after granting the Association’s request to intervene in the Single Business Portal process.
- The Association filed an administrative judicial review contesting the permit on several grounds: noncompliance with Tourism Department hospedería regulations, failure to consider prior filings, lack of notice/endorsement to the Association, conflict with recorded restrictive covenants and association bylaws, and issuance despite the pending injunction.
- The Tribunal de Apelaciones reviewed deference standards for administrative findings and ministerial permits under Ley Núm. 161‑2009 and LPAU, and concluded the OGPe/Authorized Professional acted reasonably and within the ministerial framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Compliance with Tourism Department hospedería rules | Rivera Pérez/permit lacked required Tourism Dept. regulatory approvals for hospederías | OGPe: Tourism requirements are separate; OGPe ministerial permit does not depend on Tourism certification | Held: No error — OGPe permit ministerial and independent of Tourism Dept. approvals |
| Consideration of prior portal filings | OGPe/Authorized Professional failed to evaluate prior applications under same cadastral number | OGPe: No legal requirement cited to re‑evaluate all prior filings for ministerial decision | Held: No error — plaintiff did not identify rule requiring such review; record inconclusive but not dispositive |
| Notice to Association / intervention endorsement | Association was not notified nor did it endorse the permit request; procedural defect | OGPe: Ministerial permits are excepted from the statutory neighbor/colindantes notice requirement | Held: No error — ministerial permit need not trigger the notice regime; intervention procedure was available and used |
| Effect of recorded restrictive covenants and association bylaws | Covenants (Escritura Núm. 57) and association rules prohibit commercial short‑term lodging; permit conflicts with erga omnes servidumbres | OGPe: Administrative permit does not nullify private covenants; remedies for covenant enforcement lie in court (injunction) | Held: No error — permit does not extinguish servitudes; Association must pursue injunction in first‑instance court |
| Issuance despite pending injunction litigation | OGPe improperly issued permit while injunction case against Rivera Pérez was pending | OGPe: Administrative presumptions and ministerial process govern; judicial injunction is the proper remedy to challenge grant | Held: No error — issuance does not deprive Association of judicial remedy; permit’s presumption of correctness stands absent fraud or statutory ground for revocation |
Key Cases Cited
- López Rivera v. Adm. de Corrección, 174 DPR 247 (discussing agency procedural obligations and review)
- Empresas Ferrer v. ARPe, 172 DPR 254 (deference to administrative determinations and limits of review)
- OCS v. CODEPOLA, 202 DPR 842 (presumption of regularity for agency decisions)
- Rolón Martínez v. Superintendente de la Policía, 201 DPR 26 (courts may replace agency determinations when no rational basis exists)
- SLG Fernández‑Bernal v. RAD‑MAN, 208 DPR 310 (validity and enforceability of servidumbres en equidad; private restrictions remain effective despite administrative permits)
- Residentes Parkville Sur v. Díaz Luciano, 159 DPR 374 (administrative permits do not nullify private restrictive covenants)