The 110% Superbonus represented one of the most significant opportunities to improve the Italian building heritage, encouraging renovations and redevelopment interventions. However, the case recently decided by the Court of Rimini demonstrates how the failure to comply with contractual obligations could nullify these possibilities, causing economic and legal damage.
A condominium had entrusted a company with the task of drawing up a technical report necessary to access the tax breaks provided by the Superbonus.
Despite the payment of the agreed sum and multiple reminders, the report was never delivered, leaving the condominium without the benefits provided by the law. The matter, which ended up in court, ended with a sentence which not only declared the contractual termination, but also condemned the company to repay the sums paid and pay the legal costs.
Advertisement – Advertising
The contract and the established terms
The legal matter originates from a contract stipulated in July 2021, when a condominium, interested in benefiting from the tax breaks of the 110% Superbonus, entrusted a specialized company with the task of verifying the feasibility of the project. The goal was to get a complete technical reportwhich included the assessment of the urban planning, construction and structural status of the property, together with an analysis of the conditions for accessing the tax benefits.
The agreement included specific clauses: the report had to be delivered within 60 days from the date of receipt of the necessary technical and administrative materials, such as projects and cadastral documents. This deadline was essential to allow the condominium to proceed promptly with the works and meet the deadlines set by the Superbonus legislation.
In response to the contractual commitment, the condominium had paid the agreed amount of 8,784 euros, including VAT, through regular documented payment. However, the entire operation entered into crisis when the company in charge did not respect the established deadlines, despite repeated reminders, leaving the condominium without the necessary report to access the tax benefit.
Failure to comply not only created direct economic damage, but also compromised the possibility of exploiting a highly relevant tax measure, with significant impacts on the condominium’s renovation plans.
Advertisement – Advertising
Non-compliance and attempts at resolution
Despite the agreements made and the payment of the amount due, the company in charge did not respect the contractual terms, delaying the delivery of the technical report and effectively nullifying the condominium’s chances of accessing the 110% Superbonus. One year after signing the contract, the company had admitted in writing to failed to meet the commitmentattributing the situation to alleged difficulties related to the legislation.
However, he had reassured the condominium that he would complete the work “in the shortest time possible”. These reassurances did not translate into concrete facts, and the condominium found itself forced to intervene.
After numerous reminders which remained unanswered, the condominium’s lawyers sent a formal notice of termination of the contract, requesting the refund of the sums paid. To find an alternative solution, a mediation attempt was also launched, which ended unsuccessfully.
The failure of these attempts inevitably led to the civil lawsuit, in which the condominium requested recognition of the breach, termination of the contract and compensation for the damages suffered.
Advertisement – Advertising
The decision of the Court of Rimini
The Court of Rimini fully accepted the request presented by the condominium, sanctioning the termination of the contract due to failure of the appointed company. The judge highlighted how failure to deliver the technical report, an essential element for accessing the benefits of the 110% Superbonus, constitutes a serious violation of contractual obligations.
This resulted not only in direct economic damage, but also in the loss of a once-in-a-lifetime tax opportunity, considering the stringent deadlines linked to the legislation.
The decision was based on consolidated legal principles: the creditor, in this case the condominium, documented the existence of the contract, the payment of the agreed sum and the company’s failure to comply. The latter, not appearing in court, did not provide any evidence in its defense or valid justifications for the delay.
The judge considered that the company’s contumacy, i.e. its absence in the proceedings, further strengthened the validity of the arguments and evidence provided by the appellant.
The ruling established that the company had to return the entire amount of 8,784 eurosalready paid by the condominium, with the addition of legal interest calculated until full payment. To this figure were added the expenses incurred for the mediation attempt, equal to 1,979.22 eurosand the legal costs of the judgement, settled at 2,088 euros.
The sentence, therefore, included not only the restitution of the sums paid, but also the compensation of all costs related to the management of the dispute.
The judge also underlined that the breach of contract it cannot be justified by operational difficulties or from general regulatory issues. Contractual obligations must be respected or, otherwise, those who violate them must be financially liable, especially if the damage caused jeopardizes the possibility of accessing significant benefits such as those provided by the Superbonus.
