The ruling no. 16167 of 2024: instant offense in the change of use of properties

The recent ruling no. 16167 of February 27, 2024, filed on April 18, 2024, provides an important clarification on the scope of building offenses, particularly regarding the change of use of a property. In this article, we will analyze the key points of the decision and its legal implications, paying particular attention to the concept of instant offense.

The regulatory context

The offense in question refers to Article 44, paragraph 1, letter b), of the DPR June 6, 2001, no. 380, which establishes that changing the use of a property without an appropriate authorization constitutes a crime. This principle underscores the importance of complying with existing building regulations, thereby ensuring safety and legality in the use of real estate.

The concept of instant offense

Offense of changing the use of a property in the absence of appropriate authorization - Instant offense - Moment of its completion - Indication. In the context of building offenses, the offense of changing the use of a property in the absence of appropriate authorization, as per Article 44, paragraph 1, letter b), DPR June 6, 2001, no. 380, is of an instant nature, which is completed with the signing of the negotiable act, where the change occurs through it, or with the completion of the necessary works to implement the change itself. (Conf.: no. 11209 of 1985, Rv. 171195-01).

The Court established that the change of use of a property in the absence of an authorization is completed at the moment when the negotiable act is signed or the necessary works to implement such change are completed. This aspect is crucial for understanding the timing and methods of contesting the offense. In fact, the nature of an instant offense implies that there is no continuity of illegal behavior, but that the offense is consumed at a precise moment.

Practical implications of the ruling

The practical consequences of the ruling are manifold:

  • Clarity in the definition of building offense: the ruling establishes a clear boundary regarding the moment of completion of the offense, facilitating its contestation.
  • Reflections on responsibility: if a property is modified without the necessary authorizations, the responsible party can be prosecuted criminally at the moment of signing the act or completing the works.
  • Importance of legal advice: it is essential for property owners and industry professionals to consult experts to avoid significant penalties and legal issues.

Conclusions

The ruling no. 16167 of 2024 represents an important step in the jurisprudence on building offenses, clarifying the issue of the moment of completion of the offense for changing the use. This clarification not only protects the integrity of building regulations but also offers professionals and citizens greater awareness of their legal responsibilities. In a context where building regulations are increasingly complex, it is essential to stay updated and informed to avoid penalties and ensure legality in the use of properties.

Bianucci Law Firm