The Provincial Court of the Balearic Islands has acquitted a married couple from Sant Antoni de Portmany who had been sentenced to 18 months in prison for carrying out construction work without a licence on protected rural land in Ibiza.

The court overturned the original conviction after finding that the first-instance judgment had not sufficiently explained why it rejected the defence's argument that the works were intended for an agricultural operation rather than as an extension of the family's home.

The decision does not establish that the construction was legal. Instead, the appeal court concluded that the original judgment had failed to properly assess evidence presented by the defence, affecting the defendants' right to the presumption of innocence.

An 18-Month Prison Sentence

The original ruling, issued by Ibiza Criminal Court on February 3, 2026, convicted the couple, together with the company Construcciones y Obras Poxet S.L., of a crime against territorial planning.

The sentence included 18 months in prison, a fine based on a daily rate of €8 for 12 months, special disqualification from professional activities related to construction, and an order to demolish the works and restore the land to its previous condition.

The case concerned a property in the municipality of Sant Antoni de Portmany, located within protected rural land in the Es Amunts area.

The Dispute Over What Was Built

The property contained a traditional Ibizan farmhouse with adjoining animal pens that predated 1987.

According to the established facts, new construction work was carried out without a municipal licence before September 20, 2022. The work was carried out by the woman's husband, Torcuato, who was also the sole administrator of Construcciones y Obras Poxet S.L.

The defence argued that the works were carried out on existing agricultural structures and were intended to form part of an agricultural operation, rather than to enlarge the family residence.

The case therefore hinged partly on a basic question: was the work an unauthorised residential extension, or could it be considered agricultural infrastructure potentially covered by a legal exception?

Works Were Stopped in 2022

On September 22, 2022, the Consell de Ibiza ordered the immediate suspension of the works.

The subsequent proceedings eventually led to the February 2026 conviction, which has now been overturned by the Provincial Court.

During the proceedings, the defendants' son submitted an agricultural report to the Consell in May 2024 seeking to legalise the stables and other agricultural infrastructure associated with an agricultural operation on the property.

A Favourable Consell Report

A significant development came in July 2025.

Following the relevant agricultural procedures, the president of the Consell de Ibiza issued a decree containing a favourable report on the proposed legalisation of the buildings and facilities connected with the agricultural operation.

That document became one of the main elements of the couple's appeal against their conviction.

The prosecution, however, argued that the favourable decision came after the construction works and therefore did not alter the legality of what had happened at the time.

Why the Conviction Was Overturned

The Provincial Court focused on the reasoning contained in the original judgment rather than deciding whether the works were ultimately legalisable.

According to the appeal court, the Ibiza criminal court had effectively treated the construction as an extension of the home and therefore unauthorisable without properly examining the alternative agricultural explanation presented by the defence.

The appeal court also pointed to testimony from a municipal architect, who acknowledged that the possible agricultural legalisation had not been studied, as well as evidence from an Urban Planning inspector regarding exceptions that can apply to buildings connected to agricultural operations.

The Provincial Court concluded that failing to properly assess this defence evidence constituted a lack of sufficient judicial reasoning and violated the presumption of innocence.

Why the Court Ordered an Acquittal

Normally, such a procedural deficiency could result in the case being sent back to the lower court for a new judgment.

In this case, however, the defence had requested an acquittal rather than the annulment of the original ruling.

The Provincial Court therefore opted to acquit the couple, stating that it could not declare the appropriate nullity on its own initiative during the appeal.

The acquittal consequently concerns the failure of the original judgment to properly assess the evidence, rather than a definitive ruling that the disputed works were lawful.

A Case That Highlights Ibiza's Planning Rules

The case reflects the legal complexity surrounding construction on Ibiza's protected rural land, particularly within areas such as Es Amunts.

Strict planning and environmental rules govern construction in these areas, while agricultural activity can be subject to specific legal provisions and exceptions.

The distinction between residential development and genuine agricultural infrastructure can therefore become central in legal proceedings.

The Provincial Court's ruling underlines the importance of courts addressing those distinctions and fully evaluating defence evidence when determining whether a planning offence has been established.

The Case Is Not Necessarily Over

The ruling has been notified to the parties and declares the costs to be borne by the state.

The decision can only be challenged through an appeal on a point of law before Spain's Supreme Court, with five days from notification for the relevant appeal to be lodged.

For now, the couple stand acquitted of the territorial-planning offence for which they were originally sentenced to 18 months in prison.

The case also leaves an important distinction clear: the Provincial Court did not decide that the works were definitively legal, but that the original conviction had not adequately explained why the agricultural-use defence was rejected.