The Supreme Court has overturned several requirements of the new Immigration Regulations, approved by Royal Decree 1155/2024.
The judgment dates from 8 July 2026 and was published in the BOE together with a rectification order dated 1 September 2026.
The decision is important because it changes certain rules concerning foreign minors, relatives of Spanish nationals, dependent ascendants, criminal records, temporary work agencies and the electronic submission of applications.
But there is something we must make clear from the outset:
The Supreme Court has not overturned the entire Immigration Regulations.
It has only removed certain articles or specific phrases. The rest of the Regulations remains in force.
We will explain what has changed in the simplest way possible.
Quick summary: what has the Supreme Court overturned?
The main changes are as follows:
- Temporary work agencies can no longer be automatically excluded from certain seasonal work permits.
- In some family cases, it can no longer be required that the relationship was established under Spanish law.
- An ascendant of a Spanish national who is already in Spain can prove that they are financially dependent on their family member.
- Certain criminal records cannot automatically lead to a refusal when Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union applies.
- The words “single women” and “single men” are removed from two articles concerning minors.
- A minor born in Spain may have taken temporary and justified trips without automatically losing the status provided for minors born in Spain.
- Minors whose age is unclear must receive immediate care.
- The article that established a specific general obligation to process applications electronically has been removed.
The BOE already reflects these nullities in the consolidated text of the Regulations.
1. Temporary work agencies may participate in seasonal work
The Regulations stated that temporary work agencies, known as ETTs, could not hold certain residence and work permits for seasonal activities.
It also limited their participation in changes of employer and in certain chains of contracts.
The Supreme Court has overturned that prohibition.
What does this mean?
A temporary work agency can no longer be excluded simply because it is a temporary work agency.
This may be important in sectors such as agriculture, hospitality and other jobs that need to hire many people during certain months of the year.
The Supreme Court has specifically annulled the third paragraph of Article 101.1.
2. Some family relationships no longer have to have been established under Spanish law
Article 94 regulates the residence of certain family members of Spanish nationals.
One of its sections includes the father, mother, guardian or female guardian of a Spanish minor when certain conditions are met.
The Regulations also required that the relationship had been established in accordance with Spanish law.
The Supreme Court has removed that phrase from Article 94.1(f).
¿Qué cambia?
A legal relationship validly established in another country cannot be rejected solely because it was not created under Spanish law.
This does not mean that the relationship no longer has to be proven.
It will still be necessary to provide the relevant documents to prove, for example, parentage or guardianship.
3. An ascendant can prove that they are dependent even when already in Spain
This is one of the changes that may have the greatest practical importance for families.
El Reglamento establecía que la dependencia económica debía producirse en el país de origen o de procedencia.
The Supreme Court has overturned that condition when it prevents dependency from being proven because the ascendant is already in Spain.
A simple example
Imaginemos que una mujer española tiene a su madre viviendo con ella en España.
The mother is financially dependent on her daughter.
Previously, the Administration could consider it a problem that this financial dependence was not occurring in the country of origin.
After this judgment, already being in Spain does not, by itself, prevent proving that the mother is dependent on her daughter.
But note: this does not mean that all ascendants can automatically obtain residence.
The other applicable requirements will still have to be demonstrated, and the dependency situation must be genuine.
4. Tener antecedentes penales no puede provocar siempre una denegación automática
The judgment also affects certain family members linked to European Union citizens.
The Supreme Court has annulled the parts of Articles 97.4 and 98.1 that allowed an automatic refusal based on criminal records in cases covered by Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Does this mean that criminal records no longer matter?
No, it has not.
Criminal records may still be relevant.
Lo que dice el Tribunal es que, en estos casos concretos, la Administración no puede limitarse a comprobar que existen antecedentes y denegar automáticamente la residencia.
It must assess that person’s case.
For example, it must assess the specific circumstances and carry out an individualized balancing exercise.
5. The words “single women” and “single men” are removed for certain minors
The Supreme Court also removes:
- the word “single women” from Article 159.1;
- the word “single men” in Article 160.1.
These articles regulate authorizations for certain foreign minors born in Spain or living in Spain accompanied by their parents.
This does not remove the other requirements for these authorizations.
For example, Article 160 continues to establish other conditions for minors not born in Spain.
6. Foreign minors born in Spain: travelling outside Spain no longer automatically excludes them
This is probably one of the most important changes for many families supported by organizations such as SenValos.
Article 159 regulates the temporary residence of an accompanied foreign minor born in Spain.
The Regulations stated that the minor must not have been absent from Spain since birth.
Taken literally, this could have caused a very serious problem.
A baby could have been born in Spain, lived here normally with their family and taken a short trip abroad. That trip could have caused this specific procedure to cease to apply.
The Supreme Court has corrected this situation.
What counts now?
What matters is that the child has maintained their effective habitual residence in Spain.
Therefore, a temporary and justified absence does not automatically mean that the minor loses the possibility of using this procedure.
This is probably one of the most important changes for many families supported by organizations such as SenValos.
Un niño nace en A Coruña.
Vive normalmente con sus padres en Galicia.
When the child is one year old, they travel to Colombia for a few weeks to visit their grandparents and then return to Spain.
That trip alone should not automatically mean that the minor is no longer considered to maintain their habitual residence in Spain.
The Administration may examine how long the child was away, why they left and whether Spain genuinely continued to be their usual place of residence.
The 1 September 2026 rectification order expressly incorporated this interpretation into the operative part of the judgment after detecting that it had been omitted from that part due to a material error.
Has the six-month period for applying for a minor’s residence disappeared?
No, it has not.
This point is very important.
The rectification order expressly states that it does not accept removing, by means of rectification, the six-month period provided for in Article 159.1.
Therefore, we must not confuse the two issues.
The Supreme Court corrects the interpretation concerning departures from Spain, but does not remove through this route the six-month period for submitting the application.
7. Guardianships established outside Spain
Article 160.2 also regulates certain cases involving minors accompanied by a foreign national residing in Spain who legally exercises guardianship.
The Regulations required that the relationship had been established in accordance with Spanish law.
The Supreme Court has annulled that condition.
What does this mean?
Una tutela creada válidamente en otro país no puede quedar excluida simplemente porque no se haya constituido conforme al Derecho español.
9. The Supreme Court annuls the article on mandatory electronic processing
8. Los menores cuya edad no está clara deben recibir atención inmediata
8. Minors whose age is unclear must receive immediate care
El Reglamento decía que los servicios de protección de menores prestarían, “en su caso”, la atención inmediata necesaria.
The Regulations stated that child protection services would provide, “where appropriate,” the necessary immediate care.
La consecuencia es importante.
The consequence is important.
En palabras sencillas:
primero hay que proteger a la persona mientras se comprueba su edad.
No se puede dejar su atención inmediata condicionada a una decisión posterior.
9. El Supremo anula el artículo sobre tramitación electrónica obligatoria
9. The Supreme Court annuls the article on mandatory electronic processing
Esto no significa que a partir de ahora todos los procedimientos de extranjería tengan que hacerse obligatoriamente en papel o que desaparezca la posibilidad de presentar solicitudes por internet.
El propio artículo 197 mantiene otras reglas sobre presentación presencial y electrónica.
Can the Government require electronic procedures again?
Yes.
The Supreme Court expressly leaves this possibility open.
The Government may require certain immigration procedures to be carried out electronically, but it must comply with the requirements laid down in Law 39/2015.
Specifically, that requirement must be justified and proportionate.
Además, otra sentencia del Tribunal Supremo de 29 de julio de 2026, también publicada en el BOE el 22 de septiembre, volvió a declarar la nulidad del artículo 197.2.
Has the Supreme Court annulled the new Immigration Regulations?
No, it has not.
This is one of the most important points.
The Supreme Court upheld the appeal only in part.
This means that it upheld the appellants’ arguments on some points but not others.
La propia sentencia dice que las demás peticiones de nulidad quedan desestimadas y que los artículos impugnados que no aparecen entre las nulidades continúan siendo conformes al ordenamiento jurídico en los términos indicados por el Tribunal.
The judgment itself states that the other requests for annulment are dismissed and that the challenged articles not included among the annulled provisions remain compliant with the legal system on the terms indicated by the Court.
¿Desde cuándo deben tenerse en cuenta estos cambios?
The judgment was issued on 8 July 2026.
The rectification order is dated 1 September 2026.
The judgment and the order were published in the Official State Gazette on 22 September 2026.
Therefore, the Immigration Offices must take into account the annulments declared by the Supreme Court.
If you have a pending case or a decision based specifically on one of the annulled requirements, it may be necessary to examine the case individually.
Frequently asked questions about the Supreme Court judgment and the Immigration Regulations
Can a minor born in Spain travel abroad?
Yes. A temporary and justified absence does not automatically cause them to lose the regime under Article 159. What matters is verifying that they maintain their effective habitual residence in Spain.
Has the six-month period for applying for a minor born in Spain’s residence been removed?
No, it has not. The rectification order expressly states that this point is not modified by the rectification.
Can an ascendant who is already in Spain prove that they are dependent?
Yes. Being already in Spain does not, by itself, prevent proving financial dependence. They must still demonstrate that they meet the other applicable requirements.
¿Tener antecedentes penales ya no afecta a una residencia?
That would not be correct. Criminal records may still be relevant. The judgment eliminates certain automatic refusals and requires an individual assessment in cases covered by Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Is it no longer mandatory to submit immigration applications online?
Article 197.2 has been annulled, but rules on in-person and electronic submission remain in force. In addition, the Government may establish electronic requirements for certain procedures in the future if it properly justifies them and respects the principle of proportionality. BOE
Has the entire Immigration Regulations been annulled?
No. Only the articles or passages expressly identified by the Supreme Court have been declared null. The rest remains in force.
Can this judgment affect a case that is already pending?
It can if the application depends directly on one of the requirements that the Supreme Court has declared null.
For example, a case deserves special review if:
- it was considered that a minor born in Spain falls outside Article 159 solely because they took a temporary trip;
- proof that an ascendant is dependent was rejected solely because they are already in Spain;
- it was required that a particular relationship or guardianship had been established under Spanish law;
- there was an automatic refusal based on criminal records in one of the specific situations affected by the judgment;
- there was a problem relating exclusively to the annulled obligation under Article 197.2.
This does not mean that the case must be approved automatically. The other requirements must be checked and, if a decision has already been issued, the notification date and any time limits for appealing must also be considered.
What do we recommend at SenValos?
If you have a pending immigration application or have received a refusal related to any of these requirements, it is advisable to review the decision before filing an appeal.
This is particularly important in cases involving minors born in Spain, ascendants of Spanish nationals, relatives of Spanish nationals and cases involving criminal records, where one specific sentence in the decision may be decisive in determining whether this judgment affects the case.
At ONGD SenValos, we can review the documentation and explain what consequences the judgment may have for each case.
This information was last updated on 25 September 2026.
Official sources
The main source is the Supreme Court judgment of 8 July 2026 and the rectification order of 1 September 2026, published in BOE issue no. 234 of 22 September 2026.
Judgment and rectification order in the BOE
Consolidated text of the Immigration Regulations
