Responsibility of Public Administration: Analysis of Ordinance No. 9960 of 2024

The recent Ordinance No. 9960 of April 12, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides important clarifications regarding the responsibility of public administration in cases of failure to enter into land subdivision agreements. This ruling, which addresses the issue of compensable damages, fits into a complex legal context where the principle of "alterum non laedere" plays a crucial role.

The Context of the Ruling

The case in question involved R. (M. R.) and C. (A. E.) regarding the failure to enter into a land subdivision agreement, even though the project had been previously approved. The Court of Appeal of Palermo had rejected the claim for compensation, but the Court of Cassation overturned that decision, drawing attention to the need to consider negative interest rather than lost utility.

The Maxim of the Ruling

In general. Regarding the responsibility of public administration, the damage resulting from the unlawful refusal of the municipal administration to proceed with the conclusion of the land subdivision agreement, after having approved the project, should not be measured by the lost utility, but rather by the negative interest of not being involved in operations that proved to be unnecessary, as the unjustified nature of the reconsideration constitutes a violation of the principle of "alterum non laedere," in the form of an infringement of the negotiating freedom.

This maxim highlights how, in the case of an unjustified reconsideration by public administration, the damage is no longer measured solely based on the economic utility not achieved, but rather is based on the infringement of the negotiating freedom of the affected party. In other words, the harmed citizen suffers not only an economic loss but also a violation of their freedom to undertake entrepreneurial and investment choices.

Practical Implications of the Ruling

The practical implications of this ordinance are significant and can be summarized in the following points:

  • Recognition of a new criterion for the quantification of damage.
  • Greater protection for citizens and entrepreneurs involved in land subdivision projects.
  • Promotion of stability in contractual relations with public administration.

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 9960 of 2024 represents a step forward in protecting the rights of citizens against public administration. It emphasizes the importance of respecting commitments made and ensuring that administrative decisions are consistent and justified.

Conclusions

This ruling not only clarifies the responsibility of public administration in the area of land subdivision but also fits into a broader debate on the need for greater accountability and transparency in the relationship between citizens and institutions. It is essential that public administrations learn from this lesson and work to avoid situations that may harm the rights of citizens and their freedom to engage in economic activities.

Bianucci Law Firm