Building abuse: the Municipality can acquire the property for free and demolish it a ruling by the Lazio TAR confirms the legitimacy of the demolition of an abusive work, underlining the consequences of the unauthorized building and the power of the municipalities to acquire free of non -demolished assets.

Building abusiveness is one of the most complex issues in the Italian urban planning landscape. Every year, numerous properties are built without the necessary permits, bringing to demolition orders and long legal battles between private individuals and municipal administrations.

When an owner does not respect an order of demolition, the consequences can be severe, reaching up toFree acquisition of the property by the Municipality and forced demolition at the expense of the abuse manager.

A recent case discussed by the Lazio Regional Administrative Court reiterated the rigidity of the legislation on the matter, rejecting the appeal of a citizen who had contested the demolition of an abusive work carried out on agricultural land.

But what are the implications of this sentence? And what happens when a property is declared abusive and the owner does not comply with the demolition orders?

Advertisement – Advertising

The specific case: the dispute of the demolition order

The case in question concerns the construction of a property without the necessary authorizations on an agricultural land located in the municipality of Albano Laziale. The affair began with an inspection of the municipal police, who ascertained the presence of a abusive building made without building permits. The work, made up of a multi -level structure with roof coverage, did not respect urban planning regulations and included in an agricultural area subject to particularly restrictive constraints.

Following this verification, The Municipality has issued a demolition orderimposing the owner to restore the state of the places. However, despite the provision, the property remained standing and over time it was even completed and inhabited.

Failure to comply brought the administration to a further step: the issue of a new demolition order and, subsequently, the activation of the procedure for theFree acquisition of the area to the municipal heritage.

According to the provisions of art. 31 of Presidential Decree 380/2001 (Consolidated Building Text), in the event of non -demolition within the expected terms, the abusive property can be automatically acquired by the Municipality, which has the right to demolish it at the expense of the abuse manager. This measure, in addition to discouraging the proliferation of unauthorized constructions, allows the public body to intervene directly to restore urban planning legality.

Faced with this decision, the owner filed an appeal to the TAR, supporting the illegitimacy of the municipal measures. Among the reasons for the appeal there were alleged formal irregularities in the notifications of the documents, the lack of clear indication of the areas to be acquired and the alleged absence of an adequate investigation by the Municipality.

However, the Court considered all the disputes raised unfounded, confirming the validity of the administrative action.

Advertisement – Advertising

The reasons for the TAR for the rejection of the appeal

The Lazio Regional Administrative Court, with the sentence n ° 3528/2025, rejected the appeal presented by the owner of the property, considering all the advanced disputes unfounded. In particular, the sentence highlighted several key points that justified the legitimacy of the work of the Municipality.

One of the fundamental aspects on which the TAR focused concerns the lack of appeal by the applicant, the previous demolition orders. The order of demolition of the abusive building had been issued years earlier and never contested in the terms provided for by the law. This made the definitive and no longer susceptible measure of revision.

In addition, the municipal administration had already ascertained, with subsequent inspections, that the owner not only had not provided for the demolition, but had even completed the abusive work, making it habitable.

Another decisive element was the urban constraint in force in the area. The land on which the property stood was included in an agricultural area with specific rules that prevented the construction of residential buildings, except in compliance with certain requirements, including a minimum extension of 30,000 square meters. Since the property of the applicant did not respect this condition, the construction could not have been authorized even with a possible permit in amnesty.

The TAR also clarified that theFree acquisition of the property to the municipal heritage was legitimate and compliant with current legislation. Based on art. 31 of Presidential Decree 380/2001, if an abusive work is not demolished in the terms imposed by the ordinance, the Municipality can take possession of the area to proceed with the demolition of office. The acquired area must be sufficient to guarantee the restoration of the state of the places and to allow the setting up of the construction site for the reduction.

Finally, the TAR also rejected the applicant’s objections regarding the alleged irregularities of notifications and the lack of a correct investigation. The sentence reiterated that all the measures had been adequately signed and notified and that the procedure followed by the municipal administration had been fully compliant with the principles of transparency and administrative correctness.