A woman has been convicted of unlawfully occupying the former Na Burguesa restaurant in Palma, Mallorca, and ordered to pay a €540 fine. The property, which belongs to the Parish of the Transfiguration of the Lord of Gènova, is also subject to a court order for it to be vacated.

However, the case has taken a new turn. Although the woman and her family reportedly left the premises, a different group of people was found living in the building on 5 November, according to a follow-up investigation by Última Hora.

The new occupants told the newspaper they had no intention of leaving voluntarily. Their presence raises a further question about how the court's decision can be enforced, particularly as the judgment is not yet final and the new occupants were not the people convicted in the case.

Court Convicts One Woman for Unlawful Occupation

A Palma court has convicted a woman of a minor offence of usurpation after finding that she had occupied the former Na Burguesa restaurant without permission or any contract granting her the right to remain there.

According to reporting by Última Hora on 4 November, the woman had been living in the property with her partner and two children, aged two and 14, since at least November 2025.

The court imposed a fine of €540 and ordered the property to be vacated.

The proceedings followed a complaint filed by the Diocese of Mallorca in February 2026. The identification of the people actually living in the building delayed the case for several months before the woman was formally summoned to appear in court.

The hearing took place in September.

During the proceedings, the woman acknowledged that she had entered the premises without permission and had no contract authorising her to stay there. She also told the court that she had already left the property.

Why the Diocese Took the Case to Court

The former restaurant is part of a religious complex in Gènova, Palma, which includes a sanctuary, a chapel and the venerated image of the Mare de Déu.

The building belongs to the Parish of the Transfiguration of the Lord of Gènova and forms part of a site that the Diocese of Mallorca considers to have religious and heritage significance for the local community.

The Diocese said the restaurant had been closed for years and was not suitable for use as a residence. It argued that the premises lacked essential services and adequate sanitary and structural conditions, creating potential health and safety risks for the people living there.

The presence of nearby high-voltage electrical infrastructure and radio equipment was also cited as a concern.

In February, the Diocese explained that it had sought to help the family find alternative accommodation before pursuing legal action. According to its account, proposals had been made in cooperation with Cáritas and Palma's municipal social services, but these had not been accepted.

The woman also told IB3 that she did not have stable housing. She reportedly rejected an offer from the Diocese to contribute between €600 and €800 per month towards rental accommodation, saying that the amount was insufficient for her needs.

These statements reflect the accounts reported by the parties and media coverage of the dispute.

The €540 Fine and the Right to Appeal

The court imposed a financial penalty of €540 for the minor offence of usurpation.

The judgment is not yet final and can be appealed before the Provincial Court of the Balearic Islands.

The distinction is important: although the court has issued a conviction and ordered the premises to be vacated, the decision remains subject to appeal.

According to the published reporting, once the judgment becomes final, the Diocese can request its enforcement and seek the effective eviction of anyone remaining in the property, if it has not already been vacated voluntarily.

New Occupants Found Inside the Restaurant

The situation changed again on 5 November, when Última Hora reported that new people were living inside the former restaurant.

A journalist visiting the property found a man and a woman at the premises. The man acknowledged that they were occupying the building without authorisation and told the newspaper they intended to remain until they were made to leave.

The new occupants said the previous residents had departed and left their belongings behind. They also denied that children were living with them.

Their presence is particularly relevant because the woman convicted in the earlier proceedings had already told the court that she had left the building.

The new occupants questioned whether the court's decision would apply to them, given that they were not the people named in the conviction. They said the matter was in the hands of lawyers and indicated that they did not intend to leave voluntarily.

The newspaper's report does not establish whether the court order can be directly enforced against these new occupants or whether further legal steps will be required.

What Happens Next?

The case now involves two separate developments: the conviction of the woman who previously occupied the premises and the subsequent arrival of different occupants.

The Diocese must wait for the judgment to become final before pursuing the enforcement procedure described in the reporting. The possibility of an appeal also means that the legal process is not yet complete.

The position of the people now living in the building remains a separate question. They have not been identified as defendants in the reported proceedings, and no conviction against them has been reported.

The Diocese's stated intention is to recover the property and restore the former restaurant to public use.

For now, the future of the Na Burguesa premises remains uncertain, with the court decision still subject to appeal and a new occupation reported just one day after the conviction became public.