Las Palmas ports ‘lose’ at the Supreme Court in a dispute over pilots’ fees and pilotage rules
In a decision with major impact for the legal certainty of maritime logistics in the archipelago, the Administrative Litigation Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court has admitted for processing the appeal in cassation prepared by the Corporación de Prácticos del Puerto de la Luz y Las Palmas SCP. By Order 7086/2026, dated 20 July 2026, and with Magistrate Pilar Cancer Minchot as the reporting judge, the Court will review the ruling of the High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands that upheld the Private Technical Requirements Document (Pliego de Prescripciones Particulares, PPP) approved by the Port Authority of Las Palmas in December 2022 for the La Luz, Salinetas and Arinaga terminals.
The Supreme Court considers that the appeal presents a clear objective casational interest because it goes beyond a purely local dispute. The final decision will set case law on the extent of the regulatory powers of port managing bodies when they affect the technical operation of pilotage, the setting of tariff caps outside the port domain, and price schemes with discounts for island passenger transport.
Technical standing, commencement of maneuvers and maximum fees in question
The dispute focuses on four key clauses of the service regulatory document. First, the Corporation challenges Clause 10(b).1(a), which allows requiring, as a standard of professional solvency, “generic authorised pilots”, by omitting the legal requirement for a specific appointment for the particular port established in the General Pilotage Regulation. The pilots argue that general authorisation does not replace the formal appointment for the specific berth.
Second, the appeal questions Clause 15(b).2, which provides that the pilotage service begins only when the professional steps onto the vessel’s deck. The professional group maintains that this interpretation breaches national legislation, which states that the service starts from the time the pilot boat departs the station and the pilot begins issuing instructions by radio to ensure navigation safety. They also reject Clause 20(c).5, which sets maximum fees for voluntary services or services outside the area of mandatory pilotage, arguing that the Port Authority lacks tariff-setting powers beyond its geographic demarcation and for non-mandatory services.
The fit of island discounts within Community rules
The most socially and institutionally significant economic aspect lies in Clause 20(b).8, which establishes a table of discounted tariffs for passenger vessels and roll-on/roll-off cargo ships that cover inter-island routes under scheduled regular service. The Pilots Corporation argues that this mandatory discount violates Regulation (EU) 2017/352 on the provision of port services and Article 260 of the state ports law, by forcing service providers to set prices below cost without the Port Authority establishing public financial compensation to balance the service account.
The appellants also point to an internal contradiction in the Canary Islands’ system: the Santa Cruz de Tenerife Port Authority approved its own requirements document without imposing this exceptional tariff regime, creating an unjustified asymmetry whereby pilotage is discounted in one direction of the inter-island crossing but not in the other. The Third Section of the Supreme Court must determine whether these reduced-fee schemes violate the price freedom and public aid framework, in a judgment that will redefine the rules of the pilotage market in Spain.
The article “Las Palmas ports ‘lose’ at the Supreme Court in a dispute over pilots’ fees and pilotage rules” was first published on canarymaritime.com.
