Article 244 punishes the taking or use of a motor vehicle or moped belonging to another without due authorisation and without intent to appropriate it, with a substantially reduced penalty where it is returned within forty eight hours.
1. Whoever takes or uses without due authorisation a motor vehicle or moped belonging to another, without intent to appropriate it, shall be punished with community service of thirty one to ninety days or a fine of two to twelve months, if it is returned, directly or indirectly, within a period not exceeding forty eight hours, and in no case may the penalty imposed be equal to or greater than that which would correspond if the vehicle were definitively appropriated.
2. If the act is carried out employing force in things, the penalty shall be applied in its upper half.
3. Where the return is not effected within the period indicated, the act shall be punished as theft or robbery in the respective cases.
4. If the act is committed with violence or intimidation against persons, the penalties of Article 242 shall in all cases be imposed.
Working translation prepared by Société Juridique from the consolidated Spanish text published by the Official State Gazette. It has no official status: the only authoritative version is the Spanish original, available at the Official State Gazette and reproduced verbatim in our Spanish-language entry for this provision. Source: Organic Law 10/1995 of 23 November, the Spanish Criminal Code.
Absence of intent to appropriate. The whole provision rests upon the absence of intent to appropriate. Abandoning the vehicle in a visible place, the short duration of the use and the absence of any attempt to sell it or to alter its identifying features are the elements which sustain the classification under this article rather than as theft.
Calculation of the forty eight hours. The period runs from the taking, and an indirect return is sufficient. Where the vehicle was recovered within that period, even by the police, the case law admits the reduced frame, which is habitually overlooked in the indictment.
Authorisation and its scope. A prior authorisation to use the vehicle, even where exceeded in time or in purpose, excludes the objective element. Messages, an insurance policy naming additional drivers and habitual practice between the parties are the evidence relied upon.
Force in things as distinct from tampering. Paragraph 2 requires force in things. Starting a vehicle with a key which was left in it, or with a duplicate which was lawfully held, does not amount to force, which excludes the aggravation.
Are you under investigation or facing charges in Spain? Société Juridique acts for foreign nationals throughout Spain, with offices in Alicante and Madrid and a 24-hour custody line. +34 669 30 21 13 or enquire online.
This entry is provided for information only and does not constitute legal advice. The application of any provision depends on the circumstances of the individual case and requires examination of the case file by a qualified lawyer.