Commentary on Judgment No. 18643 of 2024: Limits of Administrative Oversight in the Water Sector

The recent ordinance No. 18643 of 2024, issued by the Higher Court of Public Waters, provides an important reflection on the limits of judicial oversight concerning administrative measures in the water sector. This specific case involved a dispute regarding the regional resolution that established the amount of electricity to be provided free of charge by a hydroelectric concessionaire. The court's ordinance clarifies that the scope of oversight is constrained to assessing the flaws concerning the performance of public functions.

The Limits of Oversight by the Higher Court of Public Waters

The Court established that its oversight is limited to verifying the legitimacy of administrative measures, particularly regarding the flaws of excess power and the reasonableness of the choices made. This approach aims to ensure a balance between the autonomy of public administration and judicial control. Essentially, the court does not delve into the merits of the choices but focuses on their consistency with public objectives and the needs to be governed.

  • Assessment of flaws in the performance of public functions.
  • Verification of the reasonableness and proportionality of choices.
  • Limitation to the exclusion of merits.
The scope of oversight by the Higher Court of Public Waters, when called upon to rule in a single instance on the legitimacy of contested administrative measures, is limited to assessing flaws related to the performance of public functions (including those denoted by symptomatic figures of excess power), and therefore pertains to verifying the reasonableness and proportionality of the choice concerning the goal, without extending to the merits, having to stop not only in the face of equivalent choices but also those less reliable, as long as they are consistent with the goal to be achieved and with the needs to be governed. (In this case, the Supreme Court affirmed the jurisdiction of the TSAP, pursuant to Article 143, paragraph 1, letter a), royal decree No. 1775 of 1933 T.U. waters, with regard to the request aimed at establishing the illegitimacy of a regional resolution determining the amount of electricity that the holder of a large diversion concession for hydroelectric use was required to provide free of charge to the region, under Article 31 of Lombardy regional law No. 23 of 2019).

Implications for the Water Sector

This judgment highlights the importance of judicial oversight that, while limited, must ensure compliance with the principles of good administration and the protection of public interests. For concessionaires and operators in the hydroelectric sector, the court's decision represents a clear signal regarding the necessity to operate within the boundaries of the law and to respect regional resolutions.

Conclusions

In conclusion, ordinance No. 18643 of 2024 fits into a legal context increasingly attentive to the limits of judicial oversight on administrative measures. The ability of a court to assess the legitimacy of choices without delving into their merits represents a fundamental balance for the functioning of public administration. The implications of this judgment extend beyond the specific case, influencing future decisions and operational methods in the water sector.

Bianucci Law Firm