The request for supplementary documentation by the public administration interrupts the forfeiture period for filing an appeal against administrative silence

With judgments no. 324, 325, and 326 of May 26, 2025, the Regional Administrative Court (TAR) of Basilicata clarified that the deadline for filing an appeal against administrative silence is interrupted when the Public Administration requests supplementary documentation.

In the proceedings concluded with judgments no. 324 and 325/2025, the situations were symmetrical. An application had been submitted for the issuance of the Single Regional Authorization Measure under Article 27-bis of Legislative Decree no. 152/2006 for the construction of a photovoltaic plant and related works to connect it to the national electricity grid. The Administration responded only three years later, requesting supplementary documentation. Although the applicant complied with the request, the Administration remained inactive, thereby failing to meet the 230-day deadline for concluding the procedure.

In the case decided by judgment no. 326/2025, an application had been filed for the issuance of a Single Authorization for the construction and operation of a photovoltaic plant, to which the Region responded only two years later with a request for supplementary documentation. Here too, the Administration remained inactive, violating the 90-day deadline for concluding the procedure.

Article 31, paragraph 2 of the Administrative Procedure Code (Codice del Processo Amministrativo – c.p.a.) states that an action against administrative silence “may be brought as long as the failure to act persists and, in any case, no later than one year from the deadline for concluding the procedure.”

In all three cases, this forfeiture period had long expired, but the TAR of Basilicata nonetheless upheld all the appeals. This was because it considered that the Administration’s request for supplementary documentation constitutes an event that interrupts the time limit, whereas the request for suspension under Article 27-bis, paragraph 5, second sentence, of Legislative Decree no. 152/2006 — made by the private party and granted by the Administration — is irrelevant.

Therefore, since the remaining procedural deadline for convening the Conference of Services began to run from the date on which the applicant responded to the request for supplementary documentation, the TAR, in all three judgments, ordered the Region of Basilicata to convene the Conference of Services and conclude the procedure.