Recurrent: AENA S.M.E., S.A.
Resolution appealed: R CTBG 246/2026
In exercise of the right of access to public information, the AENA S.M.E. was requested, S.A. access to various information (statistics, contractual, financial, personnel, infrastructure and works, labour inspection, etc.) on the service of assistance to persons with reduced mobility (PMR) at the airports of Palma de Mallorca (PMI) and Barcelona-El Prat (BCN), broken down by year, from 2022 to 2025.
The requested entity issued a resolution in which it agreed to the delivery of the documented statistical information on: total assistance, with and without notice, the average waiting times for assistance and number of claims, in the period from 2022 to 11 September 2025 of the aforementioned airports; it referred the claimant to the contracting platform of the State regarding the contractual information requested. With regard to the penalties and sanctions imposed on concessionaire companies, quality, compliance and improvement audits, after granting a hearing to the affected companies, it denies their access in application of the limits provided for in article 14.1.h) and k) LTAIBG. With regard to information relating to the workforce, inspections and reports on occupational health, equipment and infrastructures, impact of works, claims, the entity indicates that it does not have the requested information that must be required from the specific companies awarded and, failing that, the airlines.
The Council partially estimates the claim, considering that the access granted through a link to the State’s contracting page, together with the identification of the files, allows access to the information concerning the documents concerned and their rectifications, but considering, with respect to the rest of the requested contractual information that is not published, together with that relating to the Aena Evaluations on the concessionaire’s compliance with the contractual prescriptions, which AENA denied under the provisions of Article 14.1.h) and k) LTAIBG, that the justification offered by the entity does not meet the requirements established by the doctrine of the Council to duly justify its use. Likewise, regarding the information that AENA.
Likewise, the Council understands that, from the perspective of LTAIBG, it is not appropriate to admit the referral that AENA makes to the awarding companies and airlines, since the information concerning the workforce and together with it the Inspection and Occupational Health reports, as well as the status of the equipment and infrastructure, are not issues that may be alien to the contracting authority, since the awarding companies are subject to reinforced control by the latter, since the correct use of public resources and compliance with current legislation are at stake, and even more if possible, when the claimant has the status of representative of trade union interests,
Finally, with regard to the information concerning the impact of infrastructure works, in relation to which Aena denies access by denying its existence, the Council lacks elements of judgment that would allow it to doubt the veracity of such an assertion, and therefore dismisses the claim on this matter.