Payment of the amount owed is required in order to appeal.

In eviction proceedings for non-payment of rent, there is one point that should be absolutely clear before considering any appeal: for the tenant-defendant to be able to appeal, they must prove that they have paid or deposited (consigned) the rent amounts that are due. This is not a recommendation or a “best practice”; it is a legal admissibility requirement and, if it is not met, the appeal will simply not be admitted or may ultimately be declared lapsed/abandoned.

This rule is set out in Article 449 of the Spanish Civil Procedure Act (Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil). In essence, the Act provides that, in proceedings that entail eviction/enforcement leading to a vacating order (lanzamiento)—as is the case with eviction—the defendant’s appeals will not be admitted if, when filing them, the defendant does not state and prove in writing that they have paid the overdue rent and, additionally, any rent that under the contract must be paid in advance.

This has a fairly intuitive legal rationale: the legislature seeks to prevent appeals from being used merely as a way to “buy time” while continuing to occupy the property without paying. That is why the requirement applies from the outset of the appeal and is not treated as a minor formality. When we speak of “proving” payment, we mean something practical: payment receipts, bank transfers, and supporting documentation, or the court’s deposit slip if the tenant chooses court deposit/consignment rather than paying the landlord directly.

Moreover, the obligation does not end with becoming “up to date” on the day the appeal is filed. Article 449 also provides that, if an appeal is pending and the appellant fails to pay the rent instalments that fall due (or any instalments that must be paid in advance), the appeal may be declared abandoned (deserted), regardless of how far it has progressed. In other words: if you appeal, you must keep paying throughout the life of the appeal.

Case law has consistently confirmed this approach. In Supreme Court Order (Auto) ATS 3675/2025, dated 9 April 2025 (ECLI:ES:TS:2025:3675A), the Court reiterates that the requirement in Article 449.1 operates as a necessary procedural prerequisite and is not an empty formality: its purpose is to protect the party who has already obtained a favourable decision and to prevent the appeals system from being used for delay. The Order also emphasises that legal aid (justice gratuita) does not turn this requirement into an “appeal deposit” and does not remove it, because this is not a fee or court deposit: it concerns rent actually owed.

From a practical, plain-language perspective: in an eviction case for non-payment of rent, trying to appeal without paying or consigning the due rent is, in most situations, a dead end. That is why, before deciding whether to lodge an appeal (and, where applicable, pursue further appeals), any serious legal assessment begins with two very concrete questions: what amount is truly outstanding, and what is the safest way to document payment or court deposit in accordance with the Civil Procedure Act. Once that issue is properly handled, it then makes sense to discuss everything else: whether there are substantive grounds, whether cure/rectification of the default is possible under the rules, whether there is a relevant procedural defect, or whether a negotiated solution would be more reasonable.