Documentary witness map · published 4 September 2026
A source-labelled reconstruction of the professional, insolvency and investment touchpoints around Sun Park. It separates reported contact, actor representation, primary documentary fact and unresolved questions.
Actors first
Headshot spaces are deliberately separated from identity evidence. A portrait is added only where a reliable public source and reuse basis are available.
Role: Administrador Concursal of Luchy Playa Blanca, S.L. in Concurso 36/2012.
reported-contact node
The 3 July 2015 item below is published as a reported contemporaneous contact, not as proof of Uría representation.
Firm: Uría Menéndez. Public Uría materials identify him as a lawyer and author on insolvency/debt-recovery matters.
public professional identity
2020 presentation role: speaker/representative in the RICPE project presentation materials preserved in this record.
representation source
Statements attributed to him below are not converted into independent title findings.
Professional/legal-services node. The record requires mandate, instruction, title/encumbrance, knowledge and conflict-screening documents to establish the precise scope of each touchpoint.
Due-diligence/advisory node described in the RICPE presentation materials. The 20 July 2021 certification materially qualifies when complete due diligence had actually occurred.
Investment-perimeter node through which Sun Park appeared in project materials. Its own 20 July 2021 certification is published as a controlling primary record.
Moment visualisation · 3 July 2015
A contemporaneous record reports that the Administrador Concursal had spoken with Javier Rubio Sanz of Uría Menéndez. This establishes a reported contact in the chronology. It does not by itself establish that Uría represented the Administrador Concursal, prove a conflict, or establish any improper information flow.
Evidence task: preserve and obtain the native communication, mandate/opening file, time entries, participants, subject matter, instructions and any conflict-check record capable of proving what the contact actually concerned.
2020 investment presentation
The preserved RICPE presentation materials attribute to José Acosta the statement that the three acquired complexes were “libres de cargas” (free of encumbrances).
Evidential limit: this is Acosta's representation. It is not independent proof of title or absence of charges.
The presentation identifies Sun Park in the RICPE portfolio/project perimeter with a €12m figure. The exact legal meaning of “portfolio,” ownership, availability and investment readiness must be tested against the underlying title and insolvency records.
The later 20 July 2021 RICPE certification says Sun Park was still in a very early study/negotiation phase and that the full legal, tax, financial, technical and insurance due diligence had not yet taken place because no letter of intent had been signed.
Chronology
Status: reported contemporaneous contact; representation/mandate not established by the contact alone.
Uría Madrid and PwC are described in the professional-processing/due-diligence architecture; José Acosta's statements about “libres de cargas” and Sun Park are actor representations requiring title verification.
Primary record: Sun Park is described as being at a very early stage of study/negotiation; complete legal, tax, financial, technical and insurance due diligence had not yet occurred because the required letter of intent had not been signed.
The recovered final consolidated pre-filing version requests “informes o notas de Uría Menéndez, PwC...” concerning title, encumbrances, suitability, risks and the real scope of Sun Park in 2020–2021. The receipt documents submission/reception on 9 July 2026; it does not independently prove byte-for-byte identity between the recovered DOCX and the physically filed version.
Production / preservation target
| Holder / node | Records to preserve and obtain | Why material |
|---|---|---|
| Uría Menéndez / named lawyers | Engagement/mandate; conflict checks; time records; emails; notes; title/encumbrance analysis; instructions; circulation lists | Defines the real scope of involvement, knowledge and information flow. |
| PwC | Scope letters; due-diligence workpapers; legal/tax inputs; title/charges assumptions; dates and gating conditions | Tests the difference between presentation language and the later certification that full DD had not yet occurred. |
| RICPE / Board | Project files; webinar deck/native recording; Board papers; investment filters; suitability files; communications to investors | Shows exactly what was represented, sourced, qualified, rejected or corrected. |
| CAM / José Acosta | Source documents for ownership and “libres de cargas” representations; communications supplying project information | Separates actor assertion from independently verified title fact. |
Evidence registry
The public manifest records the exact preserved filenames, SHA-256 hashes, evidential status and relationship IDs. Digitised text renditions are published where the source can be rendered without changing the evidential boundary; the original binary SHA-256 remains the integrity anchor.
Integrity note: a hash identifies the preserved binary. It does not by itself establish authorship, truth of its contents, filing identity or legal effect.