Public Administration Liability: Analysis of Ordinance No. 9960 of 2024

The recent Ordinance No. 9960 of April 12, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers important clarifications regarding the liability of public administration in cases of failure to enter into zoning agreements. This ruling, which addresses the issue of compensable damages, is part of a complex legal context where the principle of "alterum non laedere" plays a crucial role.

Context of the Ruling

The case in question involved R. (M. R.) and C. (A. E.) concerning the failure to enter into a zoning agreement, despite the project having been previously approved. The Court of Appeal of Palermo had rejected the claim for compensation, but the Court of Cassation overturned this decision, drawing attention to the need to consider negative interest rather than lost utility.

The Ruling's Headnote

In general. Regarding the liability of public administration, the damage arising from the unlawful refusal of the municipal administration to enter into the zoning agreement, after having approved the project, is not to be measured by lost utility, but rather by the negative interest in not being involved in operations that proved to be useless, as the unjustified nature of the reconsideration constitutes a violation of the principle of "alterum non laedere," in the form of an infringement of contractual freedom.

This headnote highlights how, in the event of an unjustified change of mind by the public administration, the damage is no longer measured solely based on the unachieved economic utility, but rather on the infringement of the interested party's contractual freedom. In other words, the harmed citizen suffers not only an economic loss but also a violation of their freedom to undertake business and investment choices.

Practical Implications of the Ruling

The practical implications of this ordinance are significant and can be summarized in the following points:

• Recognition of a new criterion for damage quantification.
• Greater protection for citizens and entrepreneurs involved in zoning projects.
• Promotion of stability in contractual relationships with public administration.

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 9960 of 2024 represents a step forward in protecting citizens' rights in their dealings with public administration. It underscores the importance of respecting commitments made and ensuring that administrative decisions are consistent and justified.

Conclusions

This ruling not only clarifies the liability of public administration in zoning matters but also fits into a broader debate on the need for greater accountability and transparency in the relationship between citizens and institutions. It is essential that public administrations learn from this lesson and work to avoid situations that could harm citizens' rights and their freedom to engage in economic activities.