Under Article 9-ter of Decree-Law No. 96/2025, converted into Law No. 119/2025, the Italian legislator established the role of Special Commissioner for these works, structurally redesigning the rules applicable to the construction and modernisation of sports infrastructure of national strategic interest.

In particular, the Commissioner is required to define one or more action plans, as well as the activities supporting them, based on the initiatives of private promoters and taking into account the operational solutions defined by the Inter-institutional Committee for Italy’s bid to host UEFA EURO 2032. The plans must be approved by decree of the Prime Minister or the political authority responsible for sport, in consultation with the Minister of Economy and Finance and the Minister of Infrastructure and Transport. 

It is clear from the new regulatory framework that stadium projects falling within the aforementioned plans may follow the special procedure governed by Article 9-ter, whilst for other sports facilities the provisions of Article 4 of Legislative Decree No. 38 of 28 February 2021, albeit simplified, continue to apply.

As regards powers, the Special Commissioner may issue an order, after consulting the competent authorities (which will have fifteen days to respond, failing which the mechanism of tacit consent will apply), in derogation from any provision of law other than criminal law, subject to compliance with anti-mafia legislation and the mandatory requirements arising from membership of the European Union. The Mayor of the municipality concerned may be appointed Deputy Commissioner, making use of municipal offices to carry out their duties.

The core of the entire regulatory framework is the procedure for issuing the single authorisation. Such authorisation, which brings together all acts of concession, authorisation, consent, agreement, opinion and clearance, however named, is issued by the Special Commissioner following a specific conference of services, convened in accordance with Articles 14-bis et seq. of Law No. 241/1990, in which all the competent authorities participate, including those responsible for environmental protection, landscape and territorial planning, cultural heritage, health and public safety. The single authorisation replaces, for all purposes, all other measures, however named, and constitutes a variation to existing urban planning instruments. It is equivalent to a declaration of public utility, non-deferrability and urgency of the works, and also serves as authorisation for the siting of the works and for the imposition of an expropriation restriction.

The purpose of the provision is clear: to establish a procedure aimed at accelerating the approval of projects relating to infrastructure of national strategic interest, in response to Italy’s widening gap vis-à-vis countries with lower sporting rankings, as Italy does not rank among the top ten European nations in terms of the number of stadiums built or modernised between 2007 and 2024. The regulatory framework grants the Commissioner special powers covering all administrative procedures relating to the approval of infrastructure projects, with a view to maximum simplification.

The powers of the Special Commissioner do not, however, appear to be limited to the stadiums already nominated for Euro 2032, but may extend to all works deemed necessary and strictly functional to the staging of the tournament, based on the initiatives of private promoters and the operational solutions of the Inter-institutional Committee for the Euro 2032 bid. 

As regards financial support, the legislator has provided for the establishment of the “Italian Sports Fund”, with the stated aim of supporting the promotion, hosting and organisation of major international sporting events and optimising investment in sports facilities, entrusting its management to the Institute for Sports and Cultural Credit S.p.A. (ICSC). The measure has a particularly broad scope: the Fund is intended not only to provide guarantees in respect of loans granted by banks or financial intermediaries, but also to provide direct or indirect financing, subscribe for equity instruments and award non-repayable grants. The operation of the Fund and the procedures for accessing its resources are governed by one or more Prime Minister’s Decrees, adopted in consultation with the Minister of Economy and Finance, upon proposal by the ICSC. By express provision of the law, the Fund may also provide financial support for private promoters in connection with public-private partnership transactions, pursuant to paragraph 5 of Article 9-ter of Decree-Law No 96/2025.

In conclusion, the legislator proceeds on the assumption that the revitalisation of sports infrastructure – and the associated urban regeneration – cannot be achieved without a decisive shift in the administrative procedures governing the approval of the relevant projects, capable of attracting private investment, including through public financial support.

ADVANT Nctm takes a further step in strengthening its expertise with the appointment of Luigi Ardizzone and Francesco Follieri, both previously Of Counsel and members of the Scientific Committee, as Partners. 

Luigi Ardizzone serves as a Full Professor of Commercial Law at the Department of Law at the University of Brescia. His expertise lies primarily in corporate law and financial markets, encompassing both litigation and M&A transactions.

Francesco Follieri serves as a Full Professor of Administrative Law at the Department of Legal Sciences of LUM “Giuseppe Degennaro.” He has extensive experience in both court and out-of-court matters across multiple areas of administrative law, including contracts and public services, healthcare, infrastructure, urban planning and construction, publicly-owned companies, energy, environment, cultural heritage, and public financial liability.

The appointment of Luigi Ardizzone and  Francesco Follieri as Partners reflects ADVANT Nctm’s long-term vision, which considers the synergy between professional practice and academic work as a distinctive element of the Firm’s identity. 

Such approach is expressed both at a technical level —through its Scientific Committee, composed of leading university professors from Italy’s top universities—and through ongoing internal and external training initiatives such as the awarding of scholarships and graduation prizes to university students, following a path aimed at contributing to the growth of new generations and the continuous enrichment of the Firm’s knowledge base. 

“The inclusion of Luigi Ardizzone and Francesco Follieri in our partnership marks an important step forward, consistent with our growth path and with the attention we have always devoted to the academic world as a key reference point for promoting a scientific and rigorous approach to professional practice. Strengthening the relationship between academia and the profession means investing in the quality of our advisory services and in the future of our community, fostering a paradigm that allows us to stand out significantly in the market”, commented Paolo Montironi, Senior Partner of ADVANT Nctm.

“We are very pleased to contribute, also as Partners, to a project that concretely promotes the synergy between academic work and legal practice. We believe that the ongoing dialogue between scientific research and professional activity is a decisive factor in developing innovative solutions and fostering growth.”, commented Luigi Ardizzone and Francesco Follieri.

The financial allocation of EUR 900 million is divided into:

• 500 million euros for private parties, of which 150 million are allocated to companies.

• 400 million euros for Public Administrations (“PA”), of which 20 million are allocated to Energy Audits[3].

Compared to the Conto Termico 2.0, the new Conto Termico provides for:

• the extension of the scope of PAs that may access the mechanism (by way of a new definition under Article 2, lett. c) of the Decree).

• the expansion of eligible technologies (Articles 5 and 8 of the Decree).

• the eligibility for efficiency interventions also to private parties on buildings belonging to the tertiary sector (Articles 4 and 7 of the Decree).

• the advance payment for the preparation of the energy audit reserved for PAs and non-economic Third Sector Entities (“ETS”), equal to 50% of the expense to be incurred (Article 15).

• the possibility of accessing the mechanism through Renewable Energy Communities or self-consumption groups of which PAs, ETS or private parties are members (Article 13).

• the possibility of accessing the mechanism through a private party within the framework of a public-private partnership configuration, exclusively for PAs (Article 13).

• the increase of the incentivised quota to 100% of the expense, for interventions carried out on buildings owned by Municipalities with a population of up to 15,000 inhabitants and used by them (Article 11).

• the increase of the incentive for certain categories of energy efficiency interventions that use components exclusively produced in the EU or that provide for the installation of systems with photovoltaic modules registered in the “photovoltaic technology register”[4], without prejudice to compliance with the maximum incentive percentages of 65% or 100% mentioned above.

Types of Eligible Interventions

The types of interventions eligible for the benefits of the Conto Termico 3.0 are[5]:

1. Small-scale interventions for the increase of energy efficiency (Title II, Article 5, para. 1, lett. a)-h)), namely:

• Thermal insulation of opaque surfaces delimiting the climatised volume.

• Replacement of transparent closures including fixtures delimiting the climatised volume.

• Installation of shading and/or shielding systems and/or external solar filtering systems for transparent closures with exposure from ESE to W, fixed or mobile, non-transportable.

• Transformation of existing buildings into “nearly zero-energy buildings”[6];

• Replacement of existing lighting systems for interiors and external appurtenances with efficient lighting systems.

• Installation of automated management and control technologies (building automation) for thermal and electrical systems, including the installation of thermoregulation systems and heat accounting.

• Installation of infrastructure elements for private charging of electric vehicles, at the building and its appurtenances, carried out in conjunction with the replacement of existing winter air-conditioning systems with winter air-conditioning systems equipped with electric heat pumps.

• Installation of solar photovoltaic systems and related storage systems, at the building or in its appurtenances, carried out in conjunction with the replacement of existing winter air-conditioning systems with winter air-conditioning systems equipped with electric heat pumps.

2. Small-scale interventions for the production of thermal energy from renewable sources and high-efficiency systems (Title III, Article 8, para. 1, lett. a-g)), namely:

• Replacement of existing winter air-conditioning systems with winter air-conditioning systems, also combined for the production of domestic hot water, equipped with electric or gas heat pumps, using aerothermal, geothermal or hydrothermal energy (with nominal useful thermal power up to 2 MW).

• Replacement of existing winter air-conditioning systems with factory-made hybrid systems or bivalent heat pump systems (with nominal thermal power up to 2 MWt).

• Replacement of existing winter air-conditioning systems or heating of greenhouses and existing rural buildings or for the production of thermal energy for production processes or input into district heating and cooling networks with biomass-fuelled heat generators, including factory-made hybrid systems or bivalent heat pump systems (with nominal thermal power up to 2 MWt).

• Installation of solar thermal systems, also combined with solar cooling systems (with gross solar surface up to 2,500 m2).

• Replacement of electric and gas water heaters with heat pump water heaters.

• Replacement of winter air-conditioning systems with connection to efficient district heating systems (with nominal useful thermal power up to 2 MW).

• Total or partial functional replacement of existing winter air-conditioning systems with micro-cogeneration units fuelled by renewable sources.

It is noted that the incentives are determined according to the eligible expenses envisaged for the implementation of the intervention, in compliance with the specific caps for: (i) unit of surface; (ii) unit of power; (iii) producibility of the systems (i.e., “physical dimension” of the property subject to intervention, surface of the property or of the roof, floor or wall subject to intervention or of the heat/energy production system) with the consequence that in order to maximise the incentive that can be received (with favourable economy of scale) it is necessary to focus on medium/large-scale interventions which are numerically limited.

Overview of PPP in the Context of the Conto Termico 3.0

PAs may access the incentives by availing themselves of a private party that assumes the capacity of Responsible Party[7], with whom a public-private partnership contract (so-called PPP) has been entered into pursuant to Article 174 et seq. of Legislative Decree No. 36 of 2023 (Public Contracts Code), excluding the social partnership. The private party that will act as Responsible Party must meet the subjective requirements indicated from time to time by the award procedure initiated by the PA pursuant to Legislative Decree 36/2023 and, in particular:

• not to incur any of the grounds for exclusion referred to in Articles 94, 95 and 98 of Legislative Decree No. 36/2023.

• to be in possession of the economic-financial and technical-professional capacity requirements proportionate to the subject matter and value of the contract, pursuant to Articles 100 et seq. of Legislative Decree No. 36/2023.

• where the contract includes the execution of works, to be in possession of SOA certification in the relevant categories and classifications, where required by applicable law^[8].

The determination of the incentives, in terms of intensity and cumulability, is carried out within the limits of the expenses attributable to the PA within the framework of the PPP contract, both in the case where the PA is directly configured as the Responsible Party and in the case where the private party is identified as the Responsible Party. All eligible expenses pursuant to the Decree that are envisaged by the executive project approved pursuant to Legislative Decree No. 36/2023 are attributable to the PA, even if falling wholly or partly within the private party's investment, or that are indicated by the Financial Economic Plan (FEP) certified by a third party.

At the stage of submission of the application for the granting of incentives, the Responsible Party must provide:

• the PPP contract, duly signed by the parties and drafted pursuant to Article 174 et seq. of Legislative Decree 36/23, having the minimum requirements provided for by the implementing rules, namely:

  • the contractual relationship established between the public party and the private party must be long-term and aimed at satisfying a public interest, including in any case the energy refurbishment of the building subject to the intervention.

  • the coverage of the necessary financial needs must come to a significant extent from resources of the private party also by reason of the operational risk assumed.

  • the executive design, realisation and management of the project must be entrusted to the private party, whilst the public party is responsible for defining the objectives and verifying their implementation.

  • the construction and operational risk connected to the realisation and management of the project must fall predominantly on the private party.

  • a duration compatible with the achievement of the public interest underlying the award and, in any case, not less than the disbursement period of the incentive increased by five years, corresponding to the term for maintaining the requirements and preserving the documentation.

  • transfer of operational risk borne by the private party, on which the investment also falls in whole or in part, without prejudice to subsequent access to incentive mechanisms.

  • attribution to the private party of the task of realising and managing the work(s) subject to award, according to methods and requirements prescribed by the public party, which defines the objectives and verifies their implementation.

  • “termination clauses” which, in the event of early termination of the contract for reasons attributable to the private party, guarantee the restitution to GSE of the incentives already disbursed or the waiver of incentives not yet received;

  • the contract must be signed on a date prior to that of submission of the application for access to the incentives (in the case of interventions with direct access);

  • the contract must be effective, at the latest, on the date of acceptance of the application for access to the incentives.

• the executive project verified and approved pursuant to Legislative Decree 36/2023 with the indication of the eligible expenses for the purposes of the Conto Termico referred to in Articles 6 and 9 of the Decree, VAT and revenues including the Conto Termico incentive and finally the expected profit;

• the Financial Economic Plan (FEP) certified by a third party containing the total amount of expenses incurred for the realisation of the intervention by way of public-private partnership, with the indication of the eligible expenses for the purposes of the Conto Termico referred to in Articles 6 and 9 of the Decree, VAT and revenues including the Conto Termico incentive and finally the expected profit;

• the payment schedule envisaged by the contract;

• declaration containing the breakdown of eligible and non-eligible expenses, signed by the PA and the Private Party, drafted according to Model 10. The value of the eligible expenses indicated must correspond to that reported on the Portaltermico;

• in the case of multi-building contracts, allocation of costs for each individual building subject to the intervention, signed by both parties.

In order for an EPC to enable the ESCO to access, on behalf of the Eligible Party, the support mechanism of the Conto Termico 3.0, it must comply with the minimum requirements provided for in Annex 8 of Legislative Decree 102/2014 and must be consistent with the provisions of the Decree. In particular, the contract:

• must present the requirements referred to in Annex 8 of Legislative Decree No. 102 of 2014;

• must comply with the provisions of standard UNI CEI EN 17669:2023;

• must comply with the provisions of Article 2, paragraph 2, lett. n), of Legislative Decree No. 102 of 2014 and, therefore, be founded on guaranteed energy savings and not exclusively on economic effects;

• must provide for clear and consistent procedures for the determination of the energy baselines and for the identification of the normalisation methods of the boundary parameters;

• must provide for a measurement system that is clear and consistent with the algorithms of the savings to be determined and guaranteed;

• must refer to a single building or property unit on which the interventions are carried out, except for the exception provided for PAs (for which multi-building EPC is permitted);

• must provide for a contract duration compatible with the provisions of Article 13, paragraph 6, lett. a) of the Decree, (i.e., incentive period + five years following the disbursement period of the incentives);

• must be drafted in such a way that the link established between the parties is not fictitious, but must materialise with a periodic recognition of a fee, for the entire contractual duration, in consideration of a service/function to be maintained until the end of the contract;

• must provide for a clear and consistent indication of expenses, revenues and profit, in line with the provisions of Article 13, paragraph 6, letter b) of Ministerial Decree of 7 August 2025.

Although project financing (currently governed by Article 193 of Legislative Decree 36/2023), one of the methods of selecting the private partner in contractual PPPs, has been the subject of a recent ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union which established the incompatibility of the right of pre-emption recognised as guarantor to the promoter, provided for by the previous Legislative Decree No. 50/2016[9] (but still reproduced in the current Legislative Decree No. 36/2023), and is (also in other respects) the subject of examination in an infringement procedure initiated by the European Commission on 8 October 2025, the conclusion of EPCs with public administrations is configured as an option which, whilst requiring careful planning and solid contractual structuring, appears destined to assume an increasingly central role in the coming years, alongside other instruments (such as, for example, the Energy Service Plus).

Indeed, the use of EPCs for the energy refurbishment of public buildings represents a significant economic driver for the supply chain of companies involved and, considering the extent of public real estate assets, an equally significant environmental driver, in terms of reduction of climate-altering emissions consequent to the achievable energy savings, as recently highlighted also by ENEA.

It must in fact be considered that Legislative Decree No. 36/2023 dedicates a specific provision to EPCs (Article 200), laying down detailed rules regarding certain contractual obligations and related methods of execution[10].

Moreover, access to the PPP instrument for the purposes of admission to the Conto Termico constitutes a further element of attractiveness, also in light of the joint preparation, by the National Anti-Corruption Authority, the State General Accounting Office and ENEA, of a standard energy performance contract or energy performance contract (EPC) for public buildings, pursuant to Article 200 of Legislative Decree No. 36/2023 and the related annexes (including the technical specification and the risk matrix).

This initiative assumes particular systematic importance: on the one hand, it promotes the homogeneity and standardisation of contractual clauses, reducing application uncertainties and structuring times for operations; on the other hand, it strengthens the bankability of projects, thanks to a clearer allocation of risks between the contracting administration and the economic operator, in consistency with the principles proper to PPP and provides a more stable and predictable regulatory framework for investors.

In order to make the structure and logic of PPP and EPCs consistent in the context of the Conto Termico 3.0, built on a logic of incentive referring to the individual intervention understood in the strict sense, it is necessary to adopt a different paradigm. In particular, it is necessary to enhance interventions, understood in the broad sense, of wider scope, which provide for a plurality of works and/or systems, and which are founded on an overall improvement of the energy performance of the system subject to intervention. Such performance, if realised in accordance with the contractual provisions and with equal cost of the energy vector, is capable of generating a measurable and advantageous saving both for the public administration and for the private partner.

In conclusion, the integration between the discipline of PPPs, the standard EPC scheme and the incentive mechanisms of the Conto Termico appears capable of promoting a wider dissemination of energy refurbishment interventions of public assets, with positive effects both on the financial and on the environmental level.

Terms of Payment of Incentives

Based on the Implementing Rules (Point 4.3), the incentive amounts are disbursed by the last day of the month following that of the end of the two-month period in which falls the date of completion of the Contract-Form[11], which coincides with the date of the communication by GSE to the Responsible Party of the provision for admission to the incentives referred to in the Decree.

For amounts up to EUR 15,000, the Decree provides for the disbursement of the incentive in a single instalment. Amounts exceeding this threshold are disbursed in constant annual instalments for the duration defined in Table 1 referred to in Article 11, paragraph 3 of the Decree (i.e., between 2 and 5 years)[12].

Pursuant to Article 11, paragraph 6 of the Decree, in relation to interventions carried out by the PA and Third Sector Entities (“ETS”), also through ESCOs or other authorised parties, disbursement in a single instalment is also provided for incentives of amounts exceeding EUR 15,000 when they opt for the direct access procedure (i.e., upon completion of the works) and not in the case of reservation (i.e., for works yet to be started or in the course of realisation, reserved for PAs and ETS).

For interventions carried out by economic ETS, also through ESCOs or other authorised parties, disbursement in a single instalment also for incentives of amounts exceeding EUR 15,000 is possible exclusively for Title III interventions[13].

Upon acceptance of reservation applications, GSE commits in favour of the requesting Responsible Party the sum corresponding to the maximum recognisable incentive. This amount is to be understood as a maximum estimated amount. The act of confirmation of the reservation issued by GSE represents a commitment to the disbursement of resources, without prejudice, in any case, to compliance with the eligibility conditions and the requirements provided for by the Decree.

The amount of the reserved incentive represents a maximum and may be subject to remodulation by GSE as a result of the investigative activities conducted on the declarations and documentation submitted by the Responsible Party for the purposes of the disbursement of the incentive.

In the case of access to incentives by way of reservation, also through an ESCO or other authorised party referred to in Article 13 of the Decree, where requested, the disbursement of the incentive may take place by way of:

• a down payment instalment[14], requested by the Responsible Party with the communication of the commencement of works.

• a possible intermediate instalment[15], which may be requested upon reaching 50% of the amount of the eligible expenses envisaged for the realisation of the intervention subject to the reservation.

• a final balance instalment, requested by the Responsible Party upon completion of the intervention, following the submission of the direct access application for accounting (so-called post-reservation).

The disbursement of the aforesaid instalments is carried out by the last day of the month following that of the end of the two-month period in which falls the date of activation of the contract, to be understood as the date of dispatch of the provision for admission to the incentives.

Where expressly provided for in certain of the contractual cases referred to in Article 14, paragraph 2, letter b) no. i., iii., iv.), namely: (i) presence of an energy audit and of a provision or other administrative act certifying the commitment to the execution of at least one of the interventions included therein; (ii) presence of an energy performance contract or another integrated supply contract for the energy refurbishment of the systems concerned; (iii) presence of a provision or other administrative act certifying the award of the works subject to the application-form, together with the minutes of delivery of the works drawn up by the works supervisor, the PA or the ETS may request that the sums reserved in its own favour be disbursed, also partially, by GSE to the ESCO signatory of the contract, under its own responsibility regarding the correct execution of the works and the quantification requested (subject to formal joint and several obligation between the parties).

It is noted that (i) a private party selected by the PA within the framework of public-private partnership forms that submits an application for a contribution under the Conto Termico - qualifying as the Responsible Party - on behalf of a PA, as well as (ii) an ESCO that submits an application for a contribution under the Conto Termico - qualifying as the Responsible Party on behalf of another party, through the signing of an EPC contract or Energy Service contract, cannot avail itself of the irrevocable collection mandate (Point 12.12.3.2. of the Implementing Rules).

It is specified, in fact, that the irrevocable collection mandate is an instrument by which payment for a good is effected, like a bank transfer receipt. In cases where the ESCO is configured as the Responsible Party, in fact, invoices and related bank transfer receipts must not be transmitted to GSE, and consequently the instrument of the irrevocable collection mandate cannot be adopted (Point 12.12.4 of the Implementing Rules).

The incentive will therefore be paid to the PA which will share it - if and to the extent agreed - with the ESCO but thereby rendering less attractive for financing entities such a type of financial structure.

On the other hand, the assignment of credit is permissible, exclusively for applications submitted in direct access mode and with instalment payment of the incentive and must relate to the totality of credits, present and future, held by the assignor against GSE by virtue of the Convention in force between the parties, until the expiry thereof or possible retrocession (Point 12.3.3. of the Implementing Rules). Furthermore:

• the credits must be assigned to a single assignee;

• the application for admission to the incentive must be made exclusively in Direct Access mode;

• the disbursement of credits must be in instalments;

  • it is necessary that the deed of assignment of credits be:

  • drafted on the basis of the standard GSE model in the form of a notarial deed or private deed authenticated by a notary and executed on a date subsequent to the acceptance provision issued by GSE.

  • complete with the Convention as an integral part of the deed of assignment of credits.

  • expressly accepted by GSE following notification, by registered letter with return receipt or certified email, to the principal and the agent.

The assignment of credit is valid until the acceptance, by GSE, of any deed of retrocession of the credit. The retrocession of the entire residual credit to the original assignor must take place in the same form, complying with the same conditions set out above, with which the deed of assignment of credits to which it refers was executed.

GSE will pay the residual credits to the original credit holder from the second month following the acceptance of the retrocession. GSE is not liable in the event of non-receipt, erroneous and/or delayed receipt of the deed.

The acceptance, both of the assignment and of the retrocession of credits, does not prejudice the power of GSE to oppose to the assignee the set-off that it could have opposed to the assignor.

[1] Pursuant to the Decree of the Ministry of the Environment and Energy Security of 7 August 2025 (“Ministerial Decree of 7 August 2025” or “Decree”) in force from 25 December 2025 (i.e., 90 days from publication in the Official Gazette). On 5 December 2025, GSE published the related implementing rules (the “Implementing Rules”).

[2] Insofar as they present technical, economic and procedural characteristics such as to justify a simplified authorisation and incentive regime, alternative to structural instruments (for large centralised production network energy infrastructures, complex industrial programmes) or complex incentives.

[3] Audits and preparation of the energy performance certificate are incentivised to the extent of 100% of the expense incurred by the public administration or by the ESCO that performs the intervention on its behalf, excluding housing cooperatives and social cooperatives.

[4] Referred to in Article 12 of Decree-Law 9 December 2023, No. 181, and in particular 5% for systems with photovoltaic modules produced in Member States of the European Union (“MS”) with module-level efficiency of at least 21.5% (lett. a); 10% for systems with photovoltaic modules with cells, both produced in MS, with cell-level efficiency of at least 23.5% (lett. b); 15% for systems with photovoltaic modules produced in MS, composed of bifacial silicon heterojunction or tandem cells produced in the EU with cell efficiency of at least 24.0% (lett. c).

[5] It is specified that the interventions referred to in points 1 and 2 must necessarily be carried out in existing buildings, parts thereof or existing property units.

[6] The nearly zero-energy building (nZEB) is defined as “a building with very high energy performance in which the very low or almost zero energy requirement is covered to a significant extent by energy from renewable sources, produced on site” by the EPBD Directive (2010/31/EU).

[7] Pursuant to Article 2, paragraph 1, letter tt) of the Decree, the Responsible Party (SR) is “the party that has incurred the expenses for the execution of the interventions referred to in this Decree and that is entitled to the incentive and enters into the contract with GSE. For the completion of the application-form and for the management of contractual relations with GSE, it may operate through a delegated party”.

[8] For the purposes of access to the incentives referred to in the Decree, where the PPP contract also provides for the management of energy savings on the building subject to the intervention, the party must be in possession of UNI CEI 11352 certification, issued by an accredited body, valid at the date of submission of the application to GSE. The certification must be maintained for the entire incentive period and for the five years following the disbursement by GSE of the incentive or of any last instalment of the recognised incentive. In the case of a temporary grouping of enterprises, consortium or special purpose company pursuant to Article 194 of Legislative Decree No. 36/2023, the provisions already specified for the ESCO apply with respect to the enterprise that must be in possession of UNI CEI 13352 certification.

[9] By judgment of 5 February 2026, the Court of Justice of the European Union declared, in Case C-810/24, the incompatibility of the right of pre-emption recognised to the promoter within the framework of the project financing procedure referred to in Article 183, paragraph 15, of the previous Public Contracts Code (Legislative Decree No. 50/2016) with European Union law and, in particular, with Directive 2014/23/EU on the award of concession contracts. Indeed, the censured right of pre-emption attributed to the promoter not awarded the procedure initiated by the contracting administration the power to adapt its own offer to that of the successful tenderer or, in the event of failure to exercise the pre-emption, to obtain reimbursement of the expenses incurred for the preparation of the proposal.

[10] In particular, Article 200 of Legislative Decree No. 36/2023 provides that in energy performance contracts or energy performance contracts (i) the management revenues of the economic operator are determined and paid according to the level of improvement of energy efficiency or other energy performance criteria established by contract, provided they are quantifiable in relation to consumption; (ii) the measure of improvement of energy efficiency, calculated according to the standards regarding certification of the energy performance of buildings and other energy-intensive infrastructures, is made available to the contracting entity by the economic operator; (iii) the measure referred to in the preceding point must be verified and monitored during the entire duration of the contract, also availing itself of appropriate IT platforms designed for the collection, organisation, management, processing, evaluation and monitoring of energy consumption.

[11] Contractual document to be executed between the Implementing Party and GSE and containing the contractual clauses that regulate the relationship between the parties in the incentive period relating to the interventions subject to the application for the granting of incentives referred to in the Decree.

[12] In the case of multi-intervention, the number of instalments is identified as the maximum value among the instalment values of the individual interventions referred to in the aforesaid Table 1, distributing equally among them the sum of the total incentive due.

[13] For such parties, where multi-interventions are carried out with a combination of Title II interventions (on buildings falling within the tertiary sector) and Title III interventions, the disbursement of incentives of amounts exceeding EUR 15,000 is carried out in multiple instalments and standardised to the maximum duration provided for by Title II interventions.

[14] The amount of the down payment instalment is equal to 50% of the benefit overall recognised, if the duration of the incentive is 2 years, it is equal to two-fifths of the benefit overall recognised, if the duration of the incentive is 5 years, in reference to the years indicated in Table 12.

[15] The amount of any intermediate instalment is quantified according to the maximum reserved incentive, with deduction of the down payment disbursed and distributing uniformly the remaining quota due, to the extent of 50%, between the intermediate instalment and the balance to be accounted for at the end of the works.

Such right – which originated as early as Law No. 109/1994, but has no equivalent in EU law – entitles the promoter, if not awarded the contract in the tender procedure launched by the contracting authority, to adjust its offer to match that of the successful tenderer or, where the pre-emption right is not exercised, to obtain reimbursement of the costs incurred in preparing the bid.

The Court of Justice, following a referral from the Italian Council of State, held that the pre-emption mechanism is contrary to the principle of equal treatment in procedures for the award of concession contracts. In particular, the Court highlighted that such a mechanism may overturn the outcome of the tender and that, where the pre-emption right is exercised, the unsuccessful promoter’s offer is substantially altered at a stage subsequent to the award, an amendment expressly prohibited by EU law (and on which the Court of Justice has already ruled on several occasions: see judgments of 13 June 2024, BibMedia, C-737/22, EU:C:2024:495; 25 April 1996, Commission v Belgium, C-87/94, EU:C:1996:161).

The Court also found the pre-emption right incompatible with the freedom of establishment under Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, insofar as the advantage granted to the promoter is liable to discourage economic operators from other Member States from participating in project financing procedures, thereby producing an anti-competitive effect. Finally, the Court excluded that such regime could be justified on grounds of efficiency and cost-effectiveness of administrative action and subsidiarity, objectives typically associated with project financing procedures, in which the private operator bears the costs of works and services of public interest, as well as of the design phase preceding the tender. These principles, in fact, do not fall within the exhaustive list of derogations from the freedom of establishment under EU law.

The Court of Justice ruled only on the incompatibility of the former project financing framework. In the meantime, the Italian legislature has sought to address the issue by amending Article 193 of Legislative Decree No. 36/2023, introducing a sort of simplified public tender procedure for the selection of the promoter. However, on the one hand, the Court of Justice’s reasoning may also apply where the promoter is selected through such competitive procedure. The Court’s judgment of 5 February 2026 is based on the “distortion” of the tender process caused by the pre-emption right, a factor which is independent of the method used to select the holder of the pre-emption right. On the other hand, the European Commission has initiated infringement proceedings against Italy, also contesting that the promoter selection procedures fail to comply with the minimum requirements of transparency and impartiality under EU law (the initiation of the infringement procedure, concerning a number of provisions of the current Public Contracts Code, is available here).

The issue therefore also arises in relation to the current version of Article 193 of Legislative Decree No. 36/2023. In any event, it is worth considering more broadly the potential impact of the judgment on the use of project financing at the initiative of a private operator. If, as we believe, the judgment marks the end of the pre-emption right, it is not a given that the institution of project financing will suffer the same fate. It is time to consider that the essential element of this procedure lies in the possibility granted to private operators to design, or, in most cases, even conceive, a public work or service. The freedom of initiative of private operators is rooted in Article 41 of the Italian Constitution, with a driving force that constitutes a unique feature in the current public procurement framework. In the past, this prerogative gave the parties submitting the proposal a clear advantage over other market operators, since the contracting authority could assess the proposal, deem it to be of public interest or feasible, and proceed to launch the tender without ever inviting other potential bidders. However, the provisions introduced by the so-called Corrective Decree ensure, from the outset, the possibility of comparing multiple proposals, thereby increasing the transparency of the procedure. It is clear that, for private operators, the risks associated with a potential failure of the initiative increase significantly, together with the substantial costs of the preliminary phase, which are nevertheless mitigated by the statutory possibility of submitting a simplified project.

However, it cannot be overlooked that any public tender procedure, launched on the basis of the promoter’s project and the other documents forming part of the proposal, including the summary of the economic and financial plan, would take place in a context where the aforementioned operator would enjoy a form of “substantive pre-emption right” stemming from the competitive advantage ensured by its full knowledge of said documents (and of any scope for their optimisation). Such an advantageous position is further reinforced by the obligation to award project financing procedures on the basis of the criterion of the most economically advantageous tender, identified according to the best quality-price ratio.

Moreover, it is worth noting that, the Court of Justice, in the judgment under review, did not call into question the right of the unsuccessful promoter to reimbursement of costs incurred in preparing the proposal – up to a maximum of 2.5% of the investment value, pursuant to Article 193 of the current Public Contracts Code – at the expense of the successful tenderer.

These factors are likely to be particularly attractive to more structured operators, willing to assume risk and equipped with adequate financial resources.

In conclusion, while the abolition of the pre-emption right may act as a barrier, making project financing less viable than in the past, it may also represent a new beginning for project financing, which could evolve towards transactions supported by the legal, economic, and technical prerequisites whose absence has often, in the past, led to the failure of hundreds of initiatives and to an enormous waste of public and private resources.

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).

More specifically, constitutional illegitimacy allegedly arises from the conflict of the above mentioned twelve-month deadline for nullification by internal review with Articles 3, paragraph 1, 9, paragraphs 1 and 2, 97, paragraph 2 and 117, paragraph 1, of the Italian Constitution (in relation to Articles 1, points  b. and d. and 5  points a. e c. of the  “The Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society" of 27 October 2005).

In particular, in the opinion of the Panel, the provision for a fixed and mandatory time limit under Article 21-nonies, paragraph 1, of Law No. 241/1990, allegedly prevents competent authorities from properly assessing “sensitive” interests such as, for example, the protection of the historical and artistic heritage. On the contrary, the provision for a “flexible deadline linked to the principle of reasonableness” might allow public authorities to adequately weigh up the interests at stake, avoiding that those of primary constitutional importance “always turn out to be mechanically recessive, as a result of the mere passage of time, with respect to the protection of a personal legal situation”.

Moreover, still according to the Panel’s interpretation, with regard to various administrative institutions, lawmakers have deemed it appropriate to establish a sui generis and temporally extended legislation to protect primary and super-individual interests. Such institutions, to give an example, stem from Article 20, paragraph 4, of Law No. 241/1990, which states that the provisions on “silence-consent” do not apply to proceedings concerning the cultural and landscape heritage; Article 19, paragraph 1, of Law No. 241/1990, which excludes from the scope of application of the SCIA (Certified Notice of Commencement of Works) the cases subject to environmental, landscape or cultural restrictions; Articles 14-bis, 14-ter and 14-quinquies of Law No. 241/1990, which establish (i) longer deadlines for the taking of decisions and for the conclusion of the works of service conferences in the cases involving administrations in charge of protecting the environment, landscape and territory and cultural heritage; (ii) as well as specific remedies against the final decision of the services conference in favour of the dissenting administrations in charge of protecting the aforesaid interests.

From a different perspective, the judges pointed out that the provision of a rigid time limit for the possibility of acting by internal review indirectly results in “the administration being prevented from using other special authoritative powers”, thus limiting the re-exercise of the administrative power resulting from the nullification of the previous measure.

We therefore await the decision of the Constitutional Court, which could call into question an important instrument of legal certainty and, as a result, trigger significant consequences for the private individuals affected by nullification by internal review.

1. The so-called Superbonus governed by Decree-Law No. 34 of 19 May 2020

Article 119 of Decree-Law No. 34/2020, converted into law, with amendments, by Law No. 77 of 17 July 2020 (hereinafter the “Relaunch Decree”), provided for the application of the “Superbonus”, a tax deduction that applies – at the rate of 110% – to certain expenses incurred by taxpayers in the period between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2022[1] in relation to specific initiatives relating to energy efficiency: reduction of seismic risk, installation of photovoltaic systems or infrastructure for recharging electric vehicles within buildings.This is a concession introduced in the context of urgent measures related to the epidemiological emergency caused by Covid-19, which consists of deductions from gross tax and is granted when certain initiatives are implemented to increase the energy efficiency of existing buildings or reduce their seismic risk.In particular, the Relaunch Decree distinguishes between “primary” or “lead” measures (the implementation of which grants the right to access the tax concessions governed therein) and “additional” or “follow-on” measures (which grant the right to access the tax concessions only if they are carried out in conjunction with a “primary” initiative)[2].The first category (“lead” interventions) includes:

• Thermal insulation works for the building shell: these are works for the heat insulation of vertical, horizontal and inclined opaque surfaces that involve the building shell, even if the unit is a property unit located within multi-family buildings that is functionally independent and has one or more independent external access points, provided that the works concern more than 25% of the gross heat dispersing area of the building concerned [3];
• Replacement of winter air conditioning systems on the common parts of buildings or on single-family buildings or on property units of multi-family buildings: works to replace existing winter air conditioning systems with centralised heating, cooling or domestic hot water supply systems meeting specific technical efficiency requirements [4];
• Anti-seismic measures: the Relaunch Decree increased to 110% the relief already provided for anti-seismic measures by Article 16, paragraphs 1-bis to 1-septies, of Legislative Decree No. 63/2013 (the so-called “Sismabonus”) [5].

The following belong to the category of “follow-on” initiatives:

• Energy efficiency works provided in Article 14 of Legislative Decree No. 63/2013: the Superbonus is also payable for the energy efficiency works provided in Article 14 of Legislative Decree No. 63/2013 (the “Ecobonus”), provided that they are carried out in conjunction with at least one of the thermal insulation initiatives for opaque surfaces or replacement of existing winter air conditioning systems [6];
• Installation of photovoltaic solar systems: the concession under examination also applies to the costs incurred for the installation of (i) photovoltaic solar systems connected to the electricity grid on buildings pursuant to Article 1, para. 1, letters a, b, c, d, of Presidential Decree No. 412/1993 and (ii) battery systems incorporated in the subsidised solar photovoltaic systems (concomitantly with or after their installation);
• Infrastructure for charging electric vehicles: the Relaunch Decree stipulates that, if infrastructure for charging electric vehicles is installed in buildings together with the construction of a "lead" initiative, the deduction already provided for in Article 16-ter of Legislative Decree No. 63/2013 is increased to 110% [7].

Finally, it should be noted that the Relaunch Decree also introduced the general option of rather than direct take-up of the deduction, for an advance contribution in the form of a discount from suppliers of goods or services or, alternatively, for the assignment of the receivable corresponding to the deduction due.Pursuant to Article 121, entities incurring costs for the works expressly listed therein [8] may opt, instead of the direct take-up of the deduction due, either: (i) for a contribution, in the form of discount on the consideration due, of a maximum amount not exceeding the consideration itself, paid in advance by the supplier of goods and services relating to the concessions; (ii) for the assignment of a tax credit corresponding to the deduction due, to other entities, including credit institutions and other financial intermediaries, with the right to subsequent assignments. 

2. Scope of application of the “Superbonus”

After identifying the works of which the implementation confers the right to access the Superbonus, it is useful to specify the subjective scope of application of the legislation in question.In this regard, paragraph 9 of Article 119 of the Relaunch Decree specifies that the Superbonus applies to works carried out by the co-owners; by natural persons outside the exercise of business, art or professional activities; by autonomous social housing institutes (IACP), however named, as well as by bodies having the same corporate purposes as the aforementioned institutions, established in the form of companies that meet the requirements of European legislation on “in house providing”; by co-operatives living in undivided property; by the ONLUS [non-profit organisations] referred to in Article 10 of Legislative Decree No. 460/1997; by voluntary organisations listed in the registers referred to in Law No. 266/1991; by social promotion associations listed in national, regional and autonomous provincial registers; by amateur associations and sports clubs listed in the register established pursuant to Article 5, paragraph 2, letter c) of Legislative Decree No. 242/1999, solely with regard to works intended exclusively for properties or parts of properties dedicated to changing rooms [9].The Revenue Agency also specified that the deduction is due to persons who own or have possession of the property where the works are to be carried out on the basis of a suitable permit at the time the works are commenced or at the time expenses are incurred, if earlier. These include, in particular, the owner, the bare owner or the holder of another right of possession in rem (usufruct, right of use, occupation as a dwelling or surface area), the person in possession of the property on the basis of a duly registered lease, including a financial lease, or commodatum agreement, with the consent of the owner to carry out the works as well as the family members of the person in possession or occupying the property. 

3. The innovations introduced by paragraph 9-bis of the Relaunch Decree

Article 63, paragraph 1 of Legislative Decree 104/2020 amended the original wording of Article 119 of the Relaunch Decree, introducing a new paragraph 9-bis according to which “Resolutions of the co-owners’ meeting concerning the approval of the works referred to in this Article and any financing intended for them, as well as subscription to the option for sale or discount referred to in Article 121, are valid if approved by a number of votes representing the majority of those present and at least one third of the value of the building […]. [10]”The law therefore provides for a reduction - compared to the provisions of Article 1136 of the Civil Code - of the majorities required for the adoption of co-owner shareholders’ meeting resolutions concerning the approval of works that give entitlement to the Superbonus.According to the regulations, in fact, (i) resolutions relating to the reconstruction of the building, extraordinary repairs of significant scope or innovations to improve the safety and salubrity of buildings and systems and to reduce the energy consumption of buildings must always be approved by a number of votes representing a majority of those present and at least half of the value of the building [11] and (ii) resolutions concerning innovations aimed at improving or facilitating the use of or improving the performance of common facilities must be approved by a number of votes representing a majority of those present and at least two-thirds of the value of the building [12].The Relaunch Decree, therefore, provides for more flexible regulations than the standard rules, precisely in order to encourage anti-seismic works and energy-efficient upgrading of buildings.Finally, it should be noted that the second part of paragraph 9-bis of Article 119 of the Relaunch Decree specifies that “Resolutions of the co-owners’ meeting, concerning the charging to one or more co-owned units of the entire expenditure relating to the approved works, shall be valid if approved by the same procedures as in the previous clause and provided that the co-owned units to which the expenditure is charged express a favourable opinion”.Accordingly, if the costs of the works are charged to individual co-owned units, it would in any case be necessary to obtain a favourable opinion from the co-owners thereof. This article is for information purposes only and is not, and cannot be intended as, a professional opinion on the topics dealt with. For further information please contact Marco Cappa or Michelangelo Eugenio Maida.  [1] Article 1, paragraph 66, letter a), No. 1 of Law no. 178/2020 amended paragraph 1 of Article 119 of Legislative Decree No. 34/2020, replacing the words “31 December 2021” with the words “30 June 2022”.[2] However, regardless of this distinction, paragraph 3 of Article 119 of the Relaunch Decree specifies that, for both categories of initiative, “For the purposes of access to the tax deduction, the initiatives […] as a whole must ensure […] the improvement of at least two energy classes of the building or of the property units located within multi-family buildings which are functionally independent and have one or more independent access points from outside, or, if this is not possible, the achievement of the highest energy class, to be demonstrated by means of the energy performance certificate (A.P.E. In the Italian acronym), referred to in Article 6 of Legislative Decree 192 of 19 August 2005, before and after the works, issued by a qualified technician in the form of a sworn statement”.[3] Article 119, paragraph 1, letter a) of Legislative Decree No. 34/2020.[4] Article 119, paragraph 1(b) and (c) of Legislative Decree No. 34/2020.[5] Article 119, paragraph 4 of Legislative Decree No. 34/2020.[6] Article 119, paragraph 2, of Legislative Decree 34/2020: this provision also specifies that energy efficiency works as indicated in the aforementioned Article 14 of Legislative Decree 63/2013 confer the right of access to the Superbonus, including regardless of installation of thermal insulation or replacement of existing winter air conditioning systems, if the building concerned is subject to the protection governed by the Code of Cultural and Landscape Heritage or such works cannot be carried out given the of building, urban planning and environmental regulations.[7] Article 119, paragraph 8, of Legislative Decree No. 34/2020.[8] Article 121, paragraph 2, of Legislative Decree No. 34/2020: “In derogation of Article 14, paragraphs 2-ter, 2-sexies and 3.1, and Article 16, paragraphs 1-quinquies, third, fourth and fifth sentences, and 1-septies, second and third sentences, of Decree-Law No. 63 of 4 June 2013, converted, with amendments, by Law No. 90 of 3 August 2013, the provisions of this Article shall apply for expenditure relating to: a) refurbishment of the built heritage referred to in Article 16-bis, paragraph 1, letters a) and b) of the consolidated law on income taxes, referred to in Decree of the President of the Republic No. 917 of 22 December 1986; b) energy efficiency referred to in Article 14 of Decree-Law No. 63 of 4 June 2013, converted, with amendments, by Law No. 90 of 3 August 2013 and referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 119; c) adoption of anti-seismic measures referred to in Article 16, paragraphs 1-bis to 1-septies of Decree-Law No. 63 of 4 June 2013, converted, with amendments, by Law No. 90 of 3 August 2013 and referred to in paragraph 4 of Article 119; d) refurbishment or restoration of the façade of existing buildings, including solely cleaning or exterior painting, referred to in Article 1, paragraphs 219 and 220, of Law No. 160 of 27 December 2019; e) installation of photovoltaic systems referred to in Article 16-bis, paragraph 1, letter h) of the consolidated law on income taxes referred to in Article 119 of this Decree; f) installation of columns for charging electric vehicles referred to in Article 16-ter of Decree-Law No. 63 of 4 June 2013, converted, with amendments, by Law No. 90 of 3 August 2013 and referred to in paragraph 8 of Article 119”.[9] More specifically, Article 119, paragraph 9 of Legislative Decree No. 34/2020 provides that: "The provisions contained in paragraphs 1 to 8 shall apply to the works carried out: a) by common ownership entities and natural persons, outside the scope of business art or professional activities, with regard to interventions on buildings comprising two to four property units separately stacked, even if owned by a single owner or in joint ownership by several natural persons; b) by natural persons, outside the scope of business activities, arts and professions, on property units, except as provided in paragraph 10; c) by independent public housing establishments (IACP) however named, as well as by bodies having the same corporate purposes as the aforementioned institutions, established in the form of companies that meet the requirements of European legislation on "in house providing" for activities carried out on properties owned by them or managed on behalf of municipalities, authorised for public residential buildings; d) by co-operatives residing in undivided property, for activities carried out on properties owned by them and allocated for use by their shareholders; d-bis) by non-profit organisations of social utility pursuant to Article 10 of Legislative Decree no. 460 of 4 December 1997, by voluntary organisations listed in the registers referred to in Article 6 of Law no. 266 of 11 August 1991, and by social promotion associations listed in the national register and in the regional registers and the independent provinces of Trento and Bolzano provided for in Article 7 of Law No. 383 of 7 December 2000; e) by amateur associations and sports clubs listed in the register established pursuant to Article 5, paragraph 2, letter c) of Legislative Decree no. 242 of 23 July 1999, solely with regard to works intended exclusively for properties or parts of properties dedicated to changing rooms".[10] This provision is in line with the provisions of Article 26, paragraph 2 of Law 10/1991, pursuant to which “For work son buildings and systems to reduce energy consumption and the use of the sources of energy indicated in Article 1, identified through an energy performance certificate or an energy survey conducted by a qualified technician, the relevant co-ownership decisions shall be valid if adopted by the majority of those present, with the number of votes representing at least one third of the value of the building”.[11] Article 1136, para. 2 and 4 and Article 1120, para. 2, No. 1 and 2 of the Civil Code[12] Article 1120, para. 1, of the Civil Code

What is requisition?

What properties can be requisitioned for use by Prefects?

What allowances are provided for requisition for use?

What is the timeframe for the payment of the above-mentioned allowances?

• if the order for requisition for use does not set out a shorter period for return[3], the allowance paid to the owner is provisionally awarded having regard to the number of months or fraction of months elapsing between the date of the order and the end of the emergency (including any extension)[4];
• in case of extension of the requisition, the difference between the allowance already paid and that due for the further period shall be paid to the owner within 30 days of the expiry of the term originally set out.

What judicial protection is available against the Prefect's orders?

Are there any other terms to arrange requisition?

• the suspension of the time limits for the conclusion of administrative proceedings, providing that “for the purposes of calculating directory, mandatory, preparatory, intraprocedural, final and executive time limits relating to the conduct of administrative proceedings, upon the request of a party or ex officio, pending as of the date of 23 February 2020 or commenced thereafter, the period between said date and 15 April 2020 shall not be taken into account”.
• the extension or deferral, for the corresponding time, of the time limits for formation of the final will of the Administration in the forms of significant silence.

Furthermore, “all certificates, statements, permits, concessions, authorizations and licences, howsoever named, expiring in the period between 31 January 2020 and 15 April 2020 shall remain valid and effective until 15 June 2020”, thus providing for an extension ex lege of their validity.What are the concrete consequences of the above provision? In particular, what are the consequences in the real estate sector?The above regulation has for example an impact on the statutory time limits for

• confirmation of the validity of the certified work commencement notice ( “SCIA”);
• the validity of building permits;
• the exercise of the right of preemption of the Ministry for Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism;
• the approval of implementation plans or any variant thereof, etc.

Some concrete scenarios:

• • SCIA filed on 10 February 2020 concerning the execution of a building project.Pursuant to Article 19, paragraph 3, of Law 241/1990, within 30 days of the receipt of the SCIA, the Administration may adopt “reasoned measures prohibiting the continuation of the activity and removing any harmful effects thereof”.Pursuant to Article 103 of the Heal Italy Decree, such term - originally expiring on 11 March 2020 - will expire on 3 May 2020.
  • Purchase and sale of a listed property of cultural interest under Legislative Decree 42/2004.The right of pre-emption may be exercised by the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism within 60 days from receipt of the notice of transfer, or within 180 days from receipt of late notice.Well, assuming that the notice of transfer was given on 10 February 2020, the final deadline within which the Ministry may exercise the right of pre-emption – originally 10 April 2020 - will be 2 June 2020.
  • A building permit in which the time limit for end of work set at 1 February 2020: such time limit is extended to 15 June 2020.It should however be recalled that Article 15 of Presidential Decree 380/2001 provides for the possibility of granting an extension of the deadline for commencement or completion of work set out in the building permit, by a reasoned order, if a supervening event occurs beyond the permit holder’s control.
  • A procedure for approval of an implementation plan, or a variant thereof, pursuant to Lombardy Regional Law No. 12/2005, for which the deadline for the filing of observations by interested third parties was 31 January 2020: the 60-day term within which the Public Administration must definitively approve the implementation plan - originally expiring on 31 March 2020 - will expire on 23 May 2020.

The provision specifies, however, that “public authorities shall take all appropriate organisational measures to ensure a reasonable duration and prompt conclusion of the proceedings, with priority being given to those to be considered urgent, including on the basis of reasoned requests from the parties concerned”.  This article is for information purposes only and is not, and cannot be intended as, a professional opinion on the topics dealt with. It is also understood that the content of this document is not based on the ascertainment of the existence of the factual and legal conditions relating to the validity and effectiveness of building permits or town planning procedures. For further information, please contact your reference counsel or send an email to the following addresses: Real Estate Department: Luigi Croce, Christian Mocellin, Rosemarie Serrato. Administrative Department: Giuliano Berruti, Marco Monaco, Francesca Bonino.

• the time limits for the filing of claims at first and second instance, cross-claims, claims for additional reasons, other claims for "challenging" purposes (e.g. revocation or third-party proceedings) shall be suspended from 8 March 2020 to 3 May 2020;
• the time limits for all other written submissions (e.g. briefs and replies) or procedural formalities (filing of claims, claims for additional reasons, etc.) shall be suspended from 8 March to 15 April 2020;
• the suspension shall not apply to the time limits for precautionary proceedings.

2. Postponement of open court and chamber hearings scheduled for between 17 March and 15 April 2020; special procedure for precautionary proceedings - Article 84, paragraph 1, of the "Cura Italia" DecreeAll open court and chamber hearings relating to proceedings pending and scheduled during the above-mentioned period will be postponed ex officio to a later date.Precautionary proceedings commenced or pending during the above period:i. shall be adjudicated by a single-judge decree of the President or of the magistrate delegated by him, in compliance with the time limits for defence (under Article 55, paragraph 5, of the Italian Code of Administrative Process) and after ascertaining compliance with the adversarial procedure requirement;ii. the single-judge decree shall set the chamber hearing date, on a date immediately following 15 April 2020, for the adversarial discussion of the precautionary motion;iii. the single-judge decree shall be effective until the chamber hearing scheduled for discussion of the precautionary motion and may be revoked or amended upon the request of a party.In cases of extreme seriousness and urgency such as not to even allow for postponement of precautionary rulings in compliance with the standard time limits for defence, a single-judge decree may in any event be requested, to be issued in accordance with the standard procedure under Article 56 of the Italian Code of Administrative Process.3. Special procedure for open court and chamber hearings scheduled for between 6 April and 15 April 2020 - Article 84, paragraph 2, of the “Cura Italia” DecreeA special procedure is provided for the above hearings in derogation from the provisions under paragraph 2 above.The special procedure shall apply only if requested by all the parties by a joint application to be filed within the mandatory time limit of two clear days before the hearing:i. the case shall be adjudicated without oral debate on the basis of the documents filed;ii. the parties shall be entitled to make brief submissions up to two clear days prior to the hearing;iii. in precautionary proceedings in which a single-judge decree has been issued upholding, fully or partially, the precautionary motion, the collegiate discussion in chambers shall be set, insofar as is possible, at the earliest hearing in chambers after 6 April 2020;iv. the panel of judges shall settle the precautionary phase in accordance with this paragraph, unless, within two clear days before the hearing in chambers, any of the parties affected by the precautionary measure files an application for postponement, in which case the hearing shall be postponed until immediately after 15 April 2020.4. Special procedure for open court and chamber hearings scheduled for between 16 April and 30 June 2020 - Article 84, paragraph 5, of the "Cura Italia" DecreeCases shall be adjudicated without oral debate on the basis of the documents filed.This is without prejudice to the possibility of settling the proceedings by means of an abridged judgment pursuant to Article 60 of the Italian Code of Administrative Process; given the absence of oral discussion, the obligation to give notice to the parties in this regard shall not apply.For public hearings for which the time limits for the filing of documents and pleadings fall within the period of suspension of deadlines (8 March - 15 April 2020), the parties:i. shall be entitled to make brief submissions up to two clear days prior to the hearing, orii. may, within the same time limit of two clear days before the hearing, apply for relief from the time limit for the filing of documents and pleadings.In such case, the judge shall adopt measures for the further and more expeditious conduct of the proceedings, possibly setting a new hearing, in relation to which the time limits for the filing documents, pleadings and replies (Article 73, paragraph 1, of the Italian Code of Administrative Process) shall be halved.5. Organisational measures to contain any adverse effects of the health emergency - Article 84, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the "Cura Italia" DecreeThe administrative justice bodies and, in particular, the Presidents of the Divisions of the Council of the State, the President of the Council of Administrative Justice for the Sicilian Region and the Presidents of the Regional Administrative Courts and of the relevant Divisions, after consulting the Regional Health Authority and the Bar Council of the city where the Office is located, may adopt any organisational measures, also affecting the handling of judicial and advisory affairs, that are required to allow compliance with the hygienic-and-sanitary instructions provided by the Ministry of Health in order to avoid gatherings in court offices and close contacts among people.Measures may also be taken, inter alia, to postpone hearings until after 30 June 2020, ensuring in any event that they are dealt with as a matter of priority, including through a reschedule of hearings, with the exception of open court and chamber precautionary hearings, electoral hearings and proceedings the delay of which may cause serious harm to the parties.For the latter cases, a declaration of urgency shall be issued by a decree not challengeable by the persons taking the above measures.Where the adoption of the organisational measures referred to above may result in the forfeiture of the parties' procedural rights, relief from time limits for the parties shall automatically apply.There is also the possibility for the panel of judges to convene chamber hearings to adjudicate on (trial and precautionary) proceedings by using remote technology.6. Administrative proceedings - Article 103 of the "Cura Italia" Decree; Article 37 of Decree Law 23/2020According to Article 103, paragraph 1, of the "Cura Italia" Decree, as amended by Article 37 of Decree Law 23/2020, for the purposes of calculating directory, mandatory, preparatory, intraprocedural, final and executive time limits relating to the conduct of administrative proceedings, upon the request of a party or ex officio, pending as of the date of 23 February 2020 or commenced thereafter, the period between said date and 15 May 2020 shall not be taken into account, in order to avoid any delay or significant silence on the part of the Administration.The terms for the formation of the final will of the Administration in the forms of significant silence provided for by the law shall be extended or deferred too, accordingly.In any case, public administrations are required to adopt "all appropriate organisational measures to ensure a reasonable duration and expeditious conclusion of proceedings, with priority being given to those to be considered urgent, also on the basis of reasoned requests by the parties concerned”.Furthermore, all authorisations, permits and licences, howsoever named, expiring in the period between 31 January 2020 and 15 April 2020 shall remain valid and effective until 15 June 2020.As expressly set out in paragraph 4, the suspension of procedural deadlines shall not apply to the payments to be ordered by administrative authorities.Finally, the enforcement of measures for vacation of property, including for non-residential use, shall suspended until 30 June 2020.7. Waste-related obligations – Article 113 of the "Cura Italia" DecreeDeadlines shall be postponed until 30 June 2020 in relation to certain waste-related obligations, namely:(a) submission of the single environmental declaration form (MUD) referred to in Article 6, paragraph 2 of Law No. 70 of 25 January 1994;b) submission of the annual communication of data relating to batteries and accumulators placed on the national market in the previous year, as referred to in Article 15, paragraph 3, of Legislative Decree No. 188 of 20 November 2008, and transmission of data relating to the collection and recycling of waste portable, industrial and vehicle batteries and accumulators pursuant to Article 17, paragraph 2, c) of Legislative Decree No. 188 of 20 November 2008;c) submission to the Coordination Centre of the communication under Article 33, paragraph 2, of Legislative Decree No. 49 of 14 March 2014 (on Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment - "WEEE");d) payment of the annual fee for registration in the National Register of Environmental Managers referred to in Article 24, paragraph 4, of Decree No. 120 of 3 June 2014. This article is for information purposes only and is not, and cannot be intended as, a professional opinion on the topics dealt with.For further information, please contact Giuliano Berruti, Marco Monaco, Francesca Bonino, Rosemarie Serrato, Carmine Morrone, Valentina Cavanna or Annapaola Prezioso.