Commentary on Judgment No. 29342 of 2024: Manifestly Groundless Constitutional Legitimacy Issue

The recent judgment No. 29342 of March 21, 2024, represents an important reference point in Italian construction law, addressing the constitutional legitimacy of Article 75 of the Presidential Decree No. 380 of June 6, 2001. This provision imposes penalties for the lack of a testing certificate, generating considerable discussions among industry operators and legal experts. The Court declared the legitimacy issue manifestly groundless, clarifying some crucial aspects of responsibility in the construction field.

The Regulatory Context

Article 75 of Presidential Decree 380/2001 establishes that anyone who uses a construction work lacking a testing certificate is punishable. The main issue raised concerned the term "anyone," which appears to include both the creator of the work and the party who uses it. This has led to questions about the conformity of the provision with Articles 3 and 27 of the Constitution, which safeguard the principle of equality and the right to defense.

Works in reinforced concrete - Offense punishing the lack of a testing certificate - Constitutional legitimacy issue of Article 75 of Presidential Decree 380/2001 for violation of Articles 3 and 27 of the Constitution - Manifestly groundless - Reasons. The constitutional legitimacy issue of Article 75 of Presidential Decree No. 380 of June 6, 2001, is manifestly groundless for conflict with Articles 3 and 27 of the Constitution, in that, through the use of the term "anyone," it punishes, for the lack of a testing certificate, both those who have created the work and those who have merely used it, since it is entirely reasonable to punish the owner who uses or allows third parties to use the untested construction, being the party who benefits from such use and who, at the same time, is obliged "ex lege" to obtain the testing certificate.

The Court's Rationale

The Court argued that the penalty set forth in Article 75 is justified by the fact that the owner of the work, by using it, is the party that derives the greatest benefit. For this reason, it is reasonable that even those who did not create the work but allow its use are punished. This interpretation is grounded in the principle of responsibility, which underlies construction law. Furthermore, the Court referred to several previous judgments, consolidating its position and reiterating the necessity to ensure public safety.

  • The owner is responsible for the safety of the work.
  • The provision aims to prevent risks to the community.
  • The penalty is proportional to the advantage gained from using the untested work.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 29342 of 2024 represents a significant step in the protection of construction safety in Italy. The manifestation of the groundlessness of the constitutional legitimacy issue reaffirms the importance of the owner's responsibility and the obligation to obtain the testing certificate. This not only ensures the safety of buildings but also protects users and the community from potential risks. Thus, the Court not only confirms the validity of the provision but also establishes an important precedent for future disputes in construction matters.

Bianucci Law Firm