Sustainable Tourism Law

322 SUSTAINABLE TOURISM LAW issue that was not justifiable as an overriding reason of public interest (it was not reasoned that it was done for financial transparency or to protect users, as is stipulated in the explanatory statements of Decree 79/2014) and that there was no proof of proportionality. Rather, the court found that the restriction favoured hotels, as vacation rentals are often made for very short periods of time (not exceeding five days), and this subsequently hindered competition. However, this same ruling found that the requirement for dwelling blueprints to be endorsed by the relevant professional association and the requirement for the dwelling to be registered for the public advertising of the activity are measures that comply with the law. Similarly, ruling 41/2017 of 11 March of the High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands declared null the provision of Decree 113/2015 of 22 May on regulating vacation rentals that excluded dwellings located in tourism or residential/ touristic developments from the scope of the law, as it found that this exclusion was contrary to open competition and favoured the traditional tourism industry. Their judgement on sworn statements and the requirement of registration is also worth noting. They declared that requiring a sworn statement to practice the activity complies with the law, while nullifying the subsequent registration requirement as it was found to be a surreptitious ex-ante measure. The ruling also annulled the prohibition of renting individual rooms as the court found that there was no overriding reason of public interest to justify it. However, they found the requirement of quality standards in dwellings, distinguishing plaques, and matters related to providing information on and advertising living conditions to be legal. On 21 December 2017, a court order from the Dispute Tribunal of the Spanish Supreme Court accepted to hear an appeal by the autonomous community of the Canary Islands against the aforementioned ruling 41/2017. The Supreme Court argued that there was interest in reviewing the ruling issued by the High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands and that it would consider the arguments presented by the autonomous community that indicated how public interest would be negatively affected by vacation rentals in touristic areas and that the LAU prevents renting individual rooms. That is to say, the Supreme Court will declare if the regulations laid out in Decree 113/2015, which aims to limit the supply of residences for vacation rentals and which requires vacation homes to be provided to clients as a whole unit are in line with the stipulations of art. 5 of Law 20/2013, which ensures market unity, if they are proportional, and if their necessity is sufficiently proven to