10 Apr Impact of the Procedural Efficiency Law on Civil Proceedings: Everything About MASC

Impact of the Procedural Efficiency Law on Civil Proceedings: Everything About MASC.

MASC stands for Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution.

One of the most relevant aspects of this reform is the promotion of Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution (MASC) as an alternative to the traditional judicial route.

The recent approval of Organic Law 1/2025, of January 2, on measures for the efficiency of the Public Justice Service, has introduced significant changes in civil proceedings in Spain, directly impacting areas such as the judicial debt recovery service.

One of the most relevant aspects of this reform is the promotion of Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution (MASC) as an alternative to the traditional judicial route.

This regulation has a direct impact on multiple areas of civil law by promoting the extrajudicial resolution of conflicts to expedite proceedings and reduce the overload in the courts.

What is the Procedural Efficiency Law?

The Procedural Efficiency Law was created with the aim of modernizing and improving the judicial system in Spain. Its main purpose is to reduce litigation and promote alternative dispute resolution methods to optimize the time and resources of both the parties involved and the judicial system.

Among the fundamental pillars of the law are:

• The obligation to use MASC before filing a lawsuit in certain cases.
• The digitization and simplification of procedures.
• The decongestion of courts through more efficient mechanisms.

What are Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution (MASC)?

The figure of Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution (MASC) is incorporated as a strategy to alleviate the overload in the courts. To this end, it is established as a requirement to have previously resorted to one of these mechanisms, such as mediation or private conciliation, for example.

The law establishes the obligation to implement MASC in civil jurisdiction, requiring that, when filing a lawsuit, the document certifying the attempt at prior negotiation be attached as a condition to proceed judicially.

The parties can choose from a wide range of MASC, ensuring flexibility in their selection. However, its application is a mandatory step before resorting to the courts.

Among the options available are private conciliation, confidential binding offers, expert opinions, mediation, and other mechanisms provided for in specific regulations, especially in consumer law.

One of the main novelties is that an agreement reached through mediation will have the same validity as a judicial resolution. This agreement will acquire res judicata value for the parties, preventing the filing of a new lawsuit on the same matter.

To have the character of an enforceable title, it must be elevated to a public deed or, when appropriate, homologated judicially, allowing its execution without the need for prior request.

The Ministry of Justice estimates that these measures could facilitate the resolution of one out of every four civil proceedings through agreement, reducing the burden on the judicial system by over half a million cases.

Impact of the Law on Civil Proceedings

With the entry into force of the Procedural Efficiency Law, MASC has transitioned from being a voluntary option to becoming a mandatory step in certain civil proceedings. This has several consequences:

1. Reduction of judicial burden. Spanish courts have historically suffered from a great saturation of cases, leading to significant delays in the resolution of disputes. With the implementation of MASC, a high percentage of conflicts are expected to be resolved without the need for trial, thus reducing judicial congestion. Faster resolution of disputes. MASC allows agreements to be reached in much shorter periods than traditional judicial proceedings, benefiting both citizens and companies looking to resolve conflicts quickly.
2. Economic savings. Judicial proceedings involve high costs in lawyer fees, court fees, and other administrative expenses. Mediation and conciliation, on the other hand, tend to be more affordable and accessible alternatives for the parties involved.
3. Flexibility and adaptability. MASC offers greater flexibility in resolving disputes, allowing the parties to negotiate terms and conditions that better suit their particular needs and circumstances.

Key Points to Consider with the Procedural Efficiency Law

1. It will be mandatory to resort to an appropriate method of dispute resolution in civil jurisdiction.
2. The main purpose is to restore the capacity for negotiation between the parties.
3. Legal assistance will be optional, except in the following cases where it will be mandatory: a) When making a binding offer b) When attending private conciliation or mediation, provided that the conciliator or mediator is not a legal professional. Legal assistance will not be required when the dispute does not exceed €2,000 or when another regulation stipulates it.
4. The opening of a negotiation procedure will interrupt the prescription period and suspend the expiration of actions from the moment the requested party receives the request.
5. Negotiation actions can be carried out in person or electronically.
6. For matters with a value below €600, the procedure will preferably be conducted through electronic means, unless this is not possible.
7. The parties must certify the negotiation with a signed document. If a third party is involved, in addition to the agreement, they must certify their identity, qualifications, professional college or institution they belong to, identity of the parties, object of the dispute, dates of meetings, and a solemn declaration.
8. If an agreement is reached, it will have res judicata value and may be elevated to a public deed or judicially homologated for enforcement.
9. Once an agreement is reached, a lawsuit cannot be filed on the same issue.

Conclusion

The Procedural Efficiency Law represents a significant step forward in modernizing the Spanish judicial system. The promotion of MASC will not only help reduce the overload in the courts but also facilitate the rapid and cost-effective resolution of disputes in various fields, including judicial debt recovery.

However, its success will depend on awareness, professional training, and societal acceptance of these methods as effective tools for dispute resolution.