Recurrent: ADIF/Ministry of Transport and Sustainable Mobility
Resolution appealed: R CTBG 0408/2026
In exercise of the right of access to public information, ADIF/MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT AND SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY was requested to have access (in full) to various recruitment files of this entity. The claim was made by a UTE contractor who was held liable for the damage caused to the Administration by the delay in complying with the demolition order for a viaduct with constructive defects, which is currently under judicial review.
The requested entity denied access on the grounds that there was an open judicial procedure (PO No. 25/2025) before the corresponding jurisdictional body, so any action or request related to it must be channelled through the judicial channel. Subsequently, during the conduct of this procedure, ADIF points out, on the one hand, that the claim is extemporaneous and, on the other hand, that the first, second, additional Provision of the LTAIBG is applicable, the request for access to information must be channeled through the channels provided for in the Law of Contentious-Administrative Jurisdiction (LJCA) —in particular, in accordance with Article 55 LJCA, which provides for the possibility of the parties requesting, in case of considering the file incomplete and within the time limit for making the request or reply, the background to be requested in the case. It is argued that the high-speed line for which the number of incidents produced is requested, in addition to high-speed passenger services, supports other medium-distance and freight train services, so that the Business Intelligence (BI) platform - the main environment for the collection and consultation of operational incidents - lacks specific filters by type of railway service, which requires multiple manual and visual searches of 12 records on approximately 14,345 circulations in the section of interest in 2024. In this regard, it is clear that the BI platform, by not contemplating segregation by type of service - high speed, medium distance Avant, goods - to obtain detailed information on incidents that have generated delays in the circulation of high-speed passenger trains, results in the need for a reprocessing action that justifies the application of the cause of inadmission provided for in article 18.1.c) LTAIBG.
The Council considered the claim on the grounds that the justification provided by ADIF was not sufficient to assess the actual occurrence of the alleged inadmissibility case. The claimant requested the total number of incidents “on the High-Speed Line linking Barcelona and Girona”, not to specify how many of these incidents affected high-speed trains. From the wording of the request, it is not possible to derive the need to discriminate between incidents that have affected the circulation of high-speed trains and those of other types of services, which is what is taken as a starting point to justify the complexity of the tasks necessary to provide the information requested.