The story
The story originates from the construction of a new complex of 46 public housing units built by the IACP on an area bordering a four-storey condominium. During the execution of the works, the residents of the adjacent building began to notice serious anomalies: widespread cracks, doors that opened and closed on their own, anomalous slopes of the floors, infiltrations and a general worsening of the stability of the building. Consequently, the same participants in the condominium promoted an urgent appeal pursuant to art. 700 cpc, in which the CTU ascertained a phenomenon of rotation of the entire building, with a lowering of approximately 17 cm on the western front, attributing it to the changes in the surface and underground water regime caused by the new construction.
According to the consultant, the IACP intervention, carried out in an area with known hydrogeological criticalities, had significantly affected the behavior of the slope, favoring the accumulation of rainwater at a depth of approximately 2.65 meters and causing a differential settlement of the foundation soil of the plaintiff building. The rotation of the building had also dangerously reduced the technical joint between the two buildings: from the original 30 cm at the base to just 8.5 cm at the top, with a real risk of “hammering” in the event of an earthquake.
Having established the IACP’s liability as a precautionary measure, the condominium owners introduced a judgment on the merits requesting compensation for damages: the cost of lifting and straightening the building, the depreciation of the individual real estate units and the repair of internal damage. The IACP had defended itself by claiming that it was no longer passively legitimized, due to the new municipal agency established in 2018, and in any case contesting every accusation, attributing responsibility to the Municipality.
The Court’s decision
The Court rejected all the preliminary objections raised by the IACP, confirming its full passive legitimacy: the new municipal agency established in 2018 had not in fact replaced the body for the works already carried out, nor could it assume responsibilities relating to projects dating back to 2004. Having clarified this point, the judge entered into the merits and the decision was clear.
On the basis of the two technical consultancies, the Court considered the causal link between the construction of the new building complex and the collapse of the plaintiff building to be proven. The expert witness ruled out that the damage could be due to structural deficiencies in the building or to the subsequent addition: the increase in load was minimal, equal to approximately 10% of the original weight, and not suitable to cause a failure of this magnitude. The cause, however, was to be found in the changes to the regime of surface and underground water generated by the new building, built in an area already characterized by hydrogeological criticalities.
Having established responsibility, the Court recognized the right to compensation for damages in favor of the condominium owners, quantifying the cost of the interventions necessary for lifting and straightening the building (estimated at approximately 300,000 euros, including preliminary works on the foundations, internal restoration, systems and technical expenses), as well as the costs for repairing internal damage to the individual housing units and common areas (quantified at 13,350.45 euros, relating to infiltrations, detachments, restorations, joint covering plates and courtyard).
The damage from depreciation of the commercial value of each apartment
Of all the consequences generated by the collapse of the building, the most economically significant was the depreciation of 35% of the commercial value of each apartment, quantified at 329 euros/m2 for the residential units and 164.50 euros/m2 for the storage on the ground floor. According to the CTU, the rotation of the building and the dangerous approach to the new IACP building has generated a serious disincentive to the marketability of the properties, so much so as to require a price reduction to make the units salable. The Court endorsed these conclusions, recognizing that the construction of the new building complex seriously and permanently compromised the stability and value of the neighboring building.
The Sicilian judge therefore clearly stated that those who build on nearby land cannot ignore the effects that the new work produces on the neighboring building, especially in geologically delicate areas. The ruling also shows another crucial aspect: depreciation damage is not an abstract concept, but a real, measurable and compensable injury.
Thank you for subscribing to the newsletter.
