Judgment No. 29344 of 2024: Landscape Crimes and Building Permits

The judgment no. 29344 of March 21, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, addresses a crucial issue in the field of landscape law, highlighting the relationship between building permits and the safeguarding measures provided in landscape plans. This decision is set within a complex regulatory context, where the protection of the environment and landscape is of fundamental importance.

The Regulatory Context

The legislative decree of January 22, 2004, no. 42, known as the Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape, establishes the methods for protecting landscape areas. According to Article 143, paragraph 9, the issuance of a building permit is required for any intervention that may violate the safeguarding rules, even if the landscape plan has only been adopted and not yet approved. This principle has been confirmed by the Constitutional Court on several occasions.

Landscape crimes - Interventions contrary to the safeguarding rules contained in a landscape plan that has already been adopted but not yet approved - Building permit - Necessity - Reasons. In the context of landscape, building, and seismic crimes, the execution of construction work contrary to the prescribed safeguarding measures on areas subject to a landscape plan that has already been adopted but not yet approved is subject to the issuance of a building permit and not to the presentation of a SCIA, given that the 'ratio' of the same lies in the need to anticipate protection at a point prior to the definitive adoption of the plan itself, thereby precluding any intervention that contradicts it.

Implications of the Judgment

The Court reiterated that every construction intervention in areas subject to a landscape plan must follow a rigorous authorization process. The decision to partially annul the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Taranto of March 15, 2023 emphasizes the necessity of ensuring adequate protection of the environment, even in the preliminary phase. The reasons for this choice lie in the desire to prevent irreparable damage to the landscape, which could arise from unauthorized interventions.

  • Relevance of landscape protection.
  • Need for permits for works in sensitive areas.
  • Prevention of building and landscape crimes.

Conclusions

The judgment no. 29344 of 2024 represents an important clarification in the field of landscape law, highlighting the importance of complying with current regulations for the safeguarding of environmental heritage. It is essential that professionals in the construction sector and citizens understand the importance of obtaining the necessary building permits to avoid sanctions and protect our natural heritage. The safeguarding of the landscape is not only a legal issue but a collective duty to ensure a sustainable future.

Bianucci Law Firm