The Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia has rejected the appeal filed by Ángel P.R., a taxi driver who was convicted by the Barcelona Provincial Court in November 2022 to six months in prison and a fine of 1,350 euros for injuring and harassing a couple of women and a friend of one of them in the parking area of the ROW nightclub in Viladecans.
In particular, the Barcelona court established that on March 3, 2019 the taxi driver was present in the parking lot when he saw two women kissing and began to heckle them, directing insults toward them such as “sluts,” “faggots,” and statements like “this is what you like.” As a result of the insults, one of the victims struck the taxi with her hand, prompting the defendant to exit the vehicle and continue the harassment in more explicit terms.
A friend of the victims stepped in to try to help, and at that moment Ángel P.R. grabbed her by the wrist, dragged her to the ground, and punched her in the face. He also assaulted the other two victims. The verdict noted that the insults and the blows were clearly motivated by the victims’ sexual orientation. This finding was central to the court’s reasoning about the criminal conduct.
The taxi driver lodged an appeal arguing that the confrontation with the victims was not a matter of discrimination or sexual orientation, but simply a reaction to the assault on his vehicle. He claimed that the insults were part of a contextual response to the verbal confrontation. He also recalled that he himself had been attacked by a group of up to seven people during the parking lot brawl, although the ruling did not hold the women responsible for those charges.
Nevertheless, the TSJC considered the driver’s insults to be “forceful” and “uttered on account of his sexual orientation,” as well as “highly humiliating and degrading.” It held that the driver saw the women kissing and that this provoked a deep irritation. The court rejected the medical report offered by the defendant as dated four days after the events and not reflective of the alleged brutality reported, though the document would be compatible with a physical struggle with one of the women. The court stated that the women suffered psychological harm affecting their dignity, freedom, privacy, and self-esteem.
Álvaro Machado, a lawyer with Vosseler Abogados who represented the injured party, welcomed the decision, saying it confirms the judiciary’s firm commitment to combating inequalities and prejudice from individuals who attack vulnerable groups. He described the incident as a savage and indiscriminate assault against his clients.
Experts in the field note that court rulings like this reinforce the legal framework protecting individuals from discrimination based on sexual orientation in public spaces. They also highlight the importance of clear, corroborated evidence when evaluating claims of hate-based aggression tied to specific acts of public harassment, especially in nightlife districts where tensions can escalate quickly. This case illustrates how the legal system views violent conduct that intertwines verbal abuse with physical assault, particularly when it intersects with protected characteristics. The decision may influence similar prosecutions in the region and beyond, serving as a reference point for future cases deemed to involve discrimination alongside criminal aggression.
Commentators emphasize that justice systems in Canada and the United States already scrutinize hate-based offenses with similar rigor, often under anti-discrimination statutes and aggravated assault provisions. Legal scholars caution that comparative analysis should consider jurisdictional differences in how injuries and harassment are charged, how intent is established, and how public spaces are regulated to balance freedom of expression with personal safety. This case, while rooted in a Spanish court, resonates with ongoing global debates about harassment, dignity, and the protections afforded to people who identify with protected groups in social settings.
Experts also point out the role of professional advocacy in such matters. The attorney for the victims stresses that the ruling strengthens the stance against attacks on vulnerable populations and highlights the need for continued vigilance by authorities, police, and the courts to uphold equal treatment under the law. For the victims, the decision marks a formal acknowledgment of the harm they endured and the broader message that discrimination in public life has real consequences in the criminal justice system.
Overall, the case underscores a clear public policy signal: insults and violence directed at individuals because of sexual orientation are not tolerated in modern judicial frameworks. It also demonstrates how courts weigh testimonies, medical evidence, and the sequence of events to determine motive and accountability. In communities across North America, including Canada and the United States, similar judgments contribute to a growing canon of hate-crime jurisprudence that seeks to protect dignity and safety in everyday encounters.
[Source: Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Cataluña verdict records and related legal commentary, cited for attribution.]