Court upholds Airport Shoppes’ contract rights at airport
The Carolina Superior Court in Puerto Rico has issued two consecutive rulings against Aerostar Airport Holdings LLC, siding with local company Airport Shoppes in ongoing disputes over contract rights at Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport, which the former operates.
The decisions deny Aerostar’s motions for reconsideration and summary judgment in separate cases involving lounge operations and rental rates, allowing Airport Shoppes’ contractual claims to stand for now.
In a declaratory judgment case, Aerostar asked the court to rule that Airport Shoppes did not hold exclusive rights to sell food and beverages inside the airport’s passenger terminals. The company argued that such a ruling would allow third parties — including CAVU Experiences AMER LLC, operator of the Escape Lounge — to provide food and beverage services independently.
The court rejected that argument, ruling that the terms of the Airport Shoppes contract and its amendments “are clear and leave no doubt about the original intention of the parties.”
According to the court’s decision, Airport Shoppes holds the exclusive right to operate and provide food and beverage services at the airport, except for airline-operated private clubs that offer complimentary meals to their members.
The court noted that Aerostar failed to demonstrate that CAVU qualifies as an airline or that its operations fall within the contractual exception.
Following “a calm and careful review of the contract,” the court concluded that Aerostar had no legal or factual grounds to support its claims. It said the contract’s provisions are “free from ambiguity or conflicting interpretations” and that any modifications must arise solely through mutual agreement between the parties.
The court denied Aerostar’s motion for reconsideration, leaving in place the June 4, 2025, judgment dismissing Aerostar’s claims.
“Fortunately, the courts vindicated our rights,” said Airport Shoppes President José Algarín. “We have always been willing to engage in dialogue, so the question is, why does Aerostar insist on trying to circumvent our laws and the contract between the parties, even though the courts consistently rule against them?”
In the separate rent-related case, the court denied Aerostar’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that key factual issues remain unresolved and must proceed to a hearing on the merits. A settlement conference is scheduled for Nov. 24 to address the outstanding disputes.
Airport Shoppes hailed the rulings as a reaffirmation of its concession rights. Aerostar, for its part, said it “will exhaust all remedies of judicial review to achieve the goal of expanding service offerings for the benefit of local and international travelers and to continue enhancing their experience.”
The rulings close the Superior Court phase, with the court siding with Airport Shoppes on its exclusive food and beverage concession rights. Aerostar has indicated it plans to appeal, signaling the dispute could continue in higher courts.
