Administrative Jurisdiction and Obligations from Supplementary Agreements: Commentary on Judgment No. 15673 of 2024

The recent order No. 15673 of June 5, 2024, issued by the Supreme Court of Cassation has sparked significant debate regarding jurisdiction in matters related to obligations arising from supplementary or substitute agreements of administrative measures. This ruling, which reaffirms the exclusive jurisdiction of the administrative judge, offers food for thought for legal practitioners and citizens involved in similar disputes.

The Context of the Ruling

In the case at hand, the appellant A. (Tanzarella Francesco) challenged a decision of the Court of Appeal of Bari that had declined the jurisdiction of the ordinary judge in favor of the administrative one. The central issue concerned the execution of a program agreement entered into between Regions and basin authorities, an area where Italian law clearly identifies the administrative judge as competent.

Non-compliance with obligations arising from supplementary or substitute agreements of administrative measures - Jurisdiction of the administrative judge - Case concerning a program agreement between Regions and basin authorities. Disputes regarding non-compliance with obligations arising from supplementary or substitute agreements of administrative measures fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the administrative judge. (In this case, the S.C. upheld the merits decision that had declined the jurisdiction of the ordinary judge regarding the request concerning the execution of a program agreement between Regions and basin authorities).

Analysis of Jurisprudence

This ruling fits within a well-defined regulatory framework established by Italian laws, particularly Law 241/1990, which regulates administrative activity and defines the principles of transparency and participation, and Law 142/1990, which addresses local autonomies. Jurisprudence has frequently reiterated that disputes related to obligations arising from program agreements fall within the exclusive competence of the administrative judge, highlighting the importance of ensuring effective judicial intervention in the public sphere.

  • Law 08/06/1990 No. 142 art. 27
  • Law 07/08/1990 No. 241 art. 11
  • Law 07/08/1990 No. 241 art. 15
  • Legislative Decree 18/08/2000 No. 267 art. 34
  • Legislative Decree 02/07/2010 No. 104 art. 133 comma 1 lett. A)

Conclusions

Judgment No. 15673 of 2024 represents an important reference point for Italian jurisprudence regarding administrative jurisdiction. It underscores the necessity for a coherent and systematic approach to addressing disputes involving obligations arising from agreements between public entities. For lawyers and legal scholars, it is essential to consider such rulings to properly guide legal strategies and ensure adequate protection of citizens' rights.

Bianucci Law Firm