The order, sent to the media, denies the suspension of this Health measure on the understanding that it is “incidentally justified and proportionate”, as it serves as a means to maintain the opening of these leisure centers without them implying “a risk exacerbated “by the transmission of the coronavirus.
The Court understands that it is inadmissible to adopt the requested measure, which requested the suspension of this prohibition, arguing the economic damage caused to the sector by the maintenance of the prohibition of consumption, as well as the “tremendous offense” that implies that food and drink are allowed in bars and restaurants as well as in other Autonomous Communities.
The TSJA argues that “it is not possible to assess the irreparability of the damage when it is alleged that it is of an economic nature, since in such cases the compensation route is perfectly possible to allow the decision that could finally be adopted to be effective.” In addition, and although the collision of interests can be admitted, the general protection of public health and the economic protection of a group, however broad it may be, “the precautionary principle forces us to give preference to the former.”
Secondly, the Chamber justifies that “it is perfectly known today, since it is established by the scientific literature related to Covid 19, that transmission by aerosols determines that there is a greater risk in closed spaces.”
Thirdly, “the allegation made in the written request is not shared in any way that ‘In the collective imagination of the users of movie theaters, a vital part of the experiences is the consumption of beverages and foods such as chocolates and Popcorn'”. Without prejudice to the fact that such may be the custom of some of the users of movie theaters, “it is not shared by all and it is certainly not the purpose of those spaces, intended for the observation of a show and in which it can The habit of consuming food and beverages, fostered by the commercial activity around it, may even be annoying. “
For the rest, the report accompanied by the opposition letter highlights the full justification of the measures adopted, their necessity, appropriateness and proportionality in view of the evolution of the number of cases.
An appeal for reversal can be filed against this order within five days of notification, which must be filed before this same Judicial Body.