[en] The early termination of a mortgage loan consists of depriving the borrower of the benefit of the deferred repayment of the loan in the various future maturities, declaring the entire debt due –before the agreed term– with the debtor being obliged to pay all the capital and interest applicable at that time. Following the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 14 March 2013 (Aziz case), a great deal of litigation was triggered due to the fact that numerous consumers had entered into mortgage loan contracts that included clauses allowing the lender to declare the early termination of the contract with only one default by the borrower. This ruling led to the amendment of article 693 of the Civil Procedure Act, requiring at least three unpaid monthly repayments (or equivalent). However, the problem did not end there, due to the dispositive nature of this precept and the thousands of on-going foreclosure proceedings. Subsequently, there were several relevant judicial pronouncements in this regard, both at European level (order of 11 June 2015 and ruling of 26 January 2017, among others) and from the Spanish Supreme Court (rulings of 23 December 2015 and 18 February 2016, among others). However, the issue was pacified after the fundamental ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 26 March 2019, which was reflected in the ruling of the Spanish Supreme Court of 11 September 2019, and after the entry into force of the Real Estate Financing Act. Article 24 of this regulation is of an imperative nature and clearly establishes the requirements that must occur in order for the lender to be allowed to accelerate a mortgage-secured loan.

[es] El vencimiento anticipado de un préstamo hipotecario consiste en privar al prestatario del beneficio de la devolución aplazada del préstamo en los diversos vencimientos futuros, declarando la totalidad de la deuda vencida –antes del plazo pactado– estando así el deudor obligado a la entrega de todo el capital e intereses aplicables en dicho momento. A raíz de la STJUE de 14 de marzo de 2013 (caso Aziz), se desencadenó una gran litigiosidad debido a que numerosos consumidores habían suscrito contratos de préstamo hipotecario que incluían cláusulas que permitían al prestamista declarar el vencimiento anticipado del contrato con un solo impago del prestatario. Esta sentencia conllevó la reforma del artículo 693 LEC, pasando a requerir el impago de, al menos, tres meses. Sin embargo, la problemática no terminó aquí, debido al carácter dispositivo de ese precepto y a las miles de ejecuciones pendientes. Posteriormente, hubo diversos pronunciamientos judiciales relevantes a este respecto, tanto a nivel europeo (ATJUE de 11 de junio de 2015 y STJUE de 26 de enero de 2017, entre otras) como del Tribunal Supremo español (SSTS de 23 de diciembre de 2015 y de 18 de febrero de 2016, ente otras). La cuestión queda pacificada con la entrada en vigor de la Ley 5/2019 (LCCI) y con la STJUE de 26 de marzo de 2019, que conllevó el dictado de la STS de 11 de septiembre de 2019. El artículo 24 de la LCCI tiene carácter imperativo y establece de forma clara los requisitos que deben acontecer para que el prestamista pueda declarar el vencimiento anticipado del contrato.