A recent ordinance of the Council of State (ordinance n° 5889 of 2024) accepted the request for postponement made by the property in a dispute linked to a building amnesty, after the refusal received from a municipal administration.
The appellant party requested to postpone the discussion since, in the meantime, the conversion law of the Save Home Decreeapproved on 28 July 2024. This legislation could have a decisive impact on the case, as it provides for new measures for the regularization of properties with construction irregularities.
The Council of State thus postponed the decision, setting a new hearing for December 2024, to evaluate whether the decree could positively influence the applicant’s position.
Advertisement – Advertising
The context of the dispute
The story revolves around the rejection of a request for a building permit by a municipal administration. The property, after having carried out construction works, submitted an application for amnesty, in accordance with the provisions of the art. 36 of Presidential Decree 380/2001, which regulates the possibility of obtaining regularization permits for unauthorized interventions.
However, the municipality rejected this request, thus opening the way to a long judicial process, which saw the property appeal first to the Regional Administrative Court (TAR) and subsequently to the Council of State, which recently issued an order on the case.
Advertisement – Advertising
The appeal to the Council of State
Faced with the rejection of the TAR, the owners chose to continue with an appeal to the Council of State, believing that the first instance decision was vitiated by an incorrect interpretation of the urban planning and administrative regulations.
The appellant based his appeal on various points, including the violation of the principle of proportionality and property rights, arguing that the interventions carried out did not substantially alter the compliance of the property with the urban planning instruments. The Council of State considered that the case presented elements of uncertainty, in particular due to the potential impact of the new regulatory framework introduced by the Save Home Decree.
For this reason, the request for postponement presented by the appellant party was accepted, which relied on the imminent entry into force of the law converting the decree.
Advertisement – Advertising
The Role of the Save Home Decree in the Controversy
The Save Home Decreeconverted into law on 28 July 2024, was introduced to address situations of construction irregularities widespread in many Italian urban areas. The law aims to simplify property regularization procedures, offering new amnesty tools for owners who find themselves in conditions of non-compliance with urban planning regulations.
The law establishes less restrictive criteria for granting amnesties and introduces compensation mechanisms that could allow regularization even in cases where, in the past, it was impossible to obtain a favorable outcome.
This decree could therefore represent a key element in the case in question, as the new provisions could pave the way for a review of the municipality’s position and a possible granting of the amnesty.
Advertisement – Advertising
The order of the Council of State and the next steps
With the referral order, the Council of State set a new hearing for December 2024, postponing the discussion of the merits to allow the effects of the conversion law to be assessed Save Home Decree.
The parties were invited to file further documentation to demonstrate whether the interventions carried out can fall within the regularization parameters established by the new legislation. This decision leaves several possibilities open: if the municipality were to recognize that the interventions can be remedied in light of the new provisions, the property’s appeal could be accepted, thus overturning the outcome of the previous judgements.
On the contrary, if the interventions were still deemed non-compliant, the matter could end with the confirmation of the denial of amnesty.
