In the matter of expropriation, the term for the transposition of the extraordinary appeal to the court of jurisdiction is reduced

With rule no. 124, published on March 27, the Regional Administrative Court of Emilia-Romagna - Parma declared inadmissible the transposition of the extraordinary appeal to the President of the Republic to the court of jurisdiction for the annulment of a measure concerning the communication of the declaration of public utility (art. 17, paragraph 2 of Presidential Decree 327/2001) and the commencement of expropriation proceedings for the acquisition of the property affected by the construction of a power line and passage easement connected to the construction of a plant in the Municipality of Noceto.

Accepting the objection raised by the counter interested party, the Regional Administrative Court ruled that pursuant to Article 119, paragraph 1(f) and paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure in judgments concerning disputes relating to measures concerning the procedures of occupation and expropriation of areas intended for the execution of public works or of public utility, all the ordinary procedural terms are halved (except, in first instance judgments, those relating to the notification of the appeal and the additional grounds), including the term for the transposition of the extraordinary appeal to the court by filing the notice of constitution pursuant to Article 48 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which constitutes a time limit of a procedural nature and must therefore be met under penalty of inadmissibility (see, ex multis, T.A.R. Veneto, Sec. II, 31 May 2024 no. 1251).

Pursuant to article 48, paragraph 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, if the party against whom an extraordinary appeal has been filed lodges an opposition, the proceedings shall continue before the competent regional administrative court ‘if the appellant, within the peremptory term of sixty days from receipt of the notice of opposition, files with the relevant secretary's office the notice of appearance before the court, notifying the other parties thereof’.

It is, therefore, already with the opposition to the extraordinary appeal that the jurisdictional phase of the case opens, without the filing of the notice of appearance being considered as “service of the application initiating proceedings” - to which the shortened time limit would not apply -.

In fact, the notice of appearance is limited to re-submitting the appeal already lodged in the administrative proceedings, which cannot be supplemented or amended in its grounds and conclusions, and cannot, therefore, in any way be equated with the lodging of the appeal, which has already been lodged, with the result that, for matters subject to the special procedure under Article 119 of the Code of Administrative Procedure the filing of the writ of summons after the reduced term of thirty days from the date of opposition renders the appeal inadmissible due to the lateness of its filing for the purposes of transposition (see also Council of State, Section VII, 9 February 2023 no. 1443; Regional Administrative Court of Emilia-Romagna - Parma, 6 August 2024 no. 217).