Use of the condominium roof: rights, limits and installation rules for photovoltaic system
In light of the principles expressed above, it can be said that in the specific context of the use of the condominium roof, Article 1102 cc allows each condominium to use the common rooffor example, to install a photovoltaic system, provided that this does not affect the rights of other condominiums and does not compromise the safety or aesthetics of the building.
So The Assembly cannot deny permission unless the intervention involves changes to the common parts: in this case the condominium must communicate the specifications of the modification and the methods of execution to the administrator. The condominium assembly can prescribe alternative methods or precautions to guarantee stability, safety and decor of the building (This resolution must be approved with the majority of those attending and at least two thirds of the value of the building). In any case, the prescriptions or alternative methods cannot be generically rendered but they go indicated concretely (Trapani Court March 21, 2018).
The Assembly can also decide the subdivision of the use of the common surface according to the different needs of the condominiumsoften necessary to install a system on common areas, which requires theconsent of the majority and two thirds of the value of the building. This is particularly important when the best exposed surface has not dividedas in the case of a slope roof. In this regard, it deserves to be reported a story recently examined by Tribunal of Trani (sentence no. 66 of 17 January 2025).
The story
Two condominiums quoted another condominium before the court to ascertain and declare the abusive and illegitimate construction by the defendant of a photovoltaic system for the production of electricity on the roof of the condominium building. The actors asked for the removal of the system edited and expenses of the defendant, in execution of two condominium resolutions, orin the subordinate, the reduction of the system Until the portion of the roof corresponding to its share, thus freeing the common space illegally occupied, in violation of articles 1102 and 1120 cc
In addition, they required the defendant’s sentence to the payment of compensation In favor of the actors, to be quantified as an equitable, due to the illegitimate occupation of the condominium roof, in addition to the payment of legal fees. With the appearance of constitution and response, the condominium that had built the contested system was tried to court, challenging and contesting any statement, request and adverse conclusion.
The decision
The Court highlighted clearly, also in light of the pretty preliminary investigation, such as the photovoltaic system created by the defendant on the condominium roof, ne it prevented equal use of other condominiumsincluding the actors. In particular, the office technical consultant Ctu he ascertained that the presence of the photovoltaic system built on the roof of the condominium building, at the exclusive service of its real estate unit, Not would have allowed each of the remaining condominiums to be able to have an area of surface sufficient to meet the similar needs of the other participants in the condominium, considering that one has remained one on the condominium coverage small space.
The Court therefore ordered the defendant not to remove, but to Reduce the size of the photovoltaic systemup to the measures concretely indicated in the technical consultancy, in order to rebalance the interests of the single defendant and the residual condominium teamboth worthy of protection. In particular, according to the judge, the photovoltaic system installed by the single condominium must be made in compliance with the proportional fee of the roof due to the owner/installerwith consequent liberation of the common space unduly occupied in excess.
Moreover, it emerged that the installation of the system was carried out in violation of a series of provisions of the condominium regulationsuch as the obligation imposed on each to refrain from using common parts in order to prevent or hinder the use of them by the other condominiums; the obligation of the individual to give prior news to the administrator of the works undertaken, in relation to his housing unit; The prohibition prescribed for each condominium to make any modification to the building, without the prior assembly approval. In any case, it should be remembered that the possible authorization for the installation of such a system granted by the assembly, or the opposite opinion expressed by it, can only be attributed the value of mere recognition of non -existenceor, vice versa, existence, of an interest and concrete claims of other condominiums with respect to the use of the common good that wants to make it the individual participant (Cass. Civ., Section VI, 17/01/2023, n. 1337).
