LA COSA JUZGADA EN LA ACCIÓN DE REGRESO DE LA LOE Y PRINCIPIO DE ECONOMÍA PROCESAL. POSIBILIDAD DE INDIVIDUALIZAR LA CUOTA DE RESPONSABILIDAD DE CADA UNO DE LOS AGENTES INTERVINIENTES EN LA CONSTRUCCIÓN EN UN SOLO JUICIO GRACIAS A LA INTERVENCIÓN PROVOCADA DE LA DISPOSICIÓN ADICIONAL SÉPTIMA. POSICIÓN EN EL FALLO DE LA SENTENCIA DEL PROMOTOR
Many doubts have been raised in recent decades about whether the sentence was binding by declaring the responsibility of the construction agents for defects in the sentence and whether this, in the case of a declaration of solidarity by the defendants, would bind the judge in an eventual return action. Current case law based on art. 1591 of the CC has chosen not to do so. It considers that the main action of the injured party against the defendant(s) is different in the facts and in the cause
... and in the cause of action from that of a defendant against another. However, observing the legislative background of the LOE and the case law that has built up joint and several liability based on Article 1591, it is possible and desirable to air all the legal questions about the liability of agents in a single trial, without having to cumulate any return action and with respect for all procedural guarantees. This is done both under the regime of Article 1591 of the LEC and in the new regime of the LOE. In this way, material justice is achieved for all those involved more efficiently, quickly and cheaply, as all the controversial issues would be dealt with in a single trial.