Review of thousandth tables: what does the law say?


Emma Potter

In the complex world of condominiums, the revision of the thousandth tables represents one of the most delicate and controversial issues.

Recently the Supreme Court, with sentence no. 1896 of 23 January 2023, had the opportunity to comment again on this issue, offering crucial food for thought for the management of condominium properties and the right to appeal assembly decisions.

But what exactly are the conditions that allow the revision of the thousandth tables? And how can condominium owners defend themselves from potentially unfair decisions?

The case and the sentence

The case in question focuses on the appeal of a meeting resolution which had introduced new thousandth tables, following significant renovations carried out by some condominiums.

These modifications had altered the consistency, value and intended use of the apartments involved. Despite these obvious transformations, some owners believed that these changes were not sufficient to justify changing the millesimal tables.

The judge of first instance annulled the resolution, but ordered a revision of the tables based on material errors found in their drafting.

The appellants, not satisfied, took the matter to the Court of Appeal, which confirmed the first instance decision, underlining the increase in usability and value of the modified properties.

The Court of Cassation confirmed the central role of the condominium administrator in these contexts, reiterating that the passive legitimation to take action lies exclusively with the latter, as provided for by article 1130 of the Civil Code.

Important is the principle that every single condominium owner has the legitimacy to request the revision of the thousandth tables, regardless of the actions of the condominium itself. The Court clarified that the right to review arises not only in the presence of obvious material errors, but also when the conditions of part of the building undergo changes such as to significantly alter the proportional values ​​of the real estate units.

This approach poses a fundamental question: what are the specific criteria that the judge must use to evaluate requests for revision of the thousandth tables? And how can condominium owners protect their rights in the context of these complex real estate dynamics?

Conclusions and implications for condominiums

In its decision, the Supreme Court highlighted how it is essential for judges to carefully verify claims relating to errors in thousandth tables and alterations in property values. Judges must take into consideration a variety of objective elements such as surface area, floor height, brightness, and exposure to ensure that the thousandth tables accurately reflect the reality of the condominium.

This verification and compliance process not only ensures fairness among condominium owners but also establishes an important precedent for future condominium ownership disputes.

The final verdict of the Supreme Court confirms that the significant changes made by individual condominiums justify the revision of the thousandth tableswhile underlining the need for an exact legal procedure and the correct application of the laws in force.