Order no. 19711 of 2024: The Validity of Urban Planning Certification in Land Sales

The recent order no. 19711 of July 17, 2024, from the Court of Cassation offers important clarifications regarding the sale of land that, after the conclusion of the deed, became non-buildable. This ruling is part of a complex legal context, where the nullity of a sales contract can be challenged due to issues related to urban planning certification. The judgment, in fact, emphasizes the possibility of supplementing the urban planning certification by one of the contracting parties, highlighting the special nature of the nullity provided for by Presidential Decree no. 380 of 2001.

Regulatory and Jurisprudential Context

The central issue concerns Article 30, paragraph 2, of Presidential Decree no. 380 of 2001, which establishes that the lack of precise proof of the urban planning destination of a buildable plot of land represents a condition for nullity. However, the Court has reiterated that this nullity is special and can only be invoked by the interested parties. This means that a contracting party can, through their own initiative, remedy the defect of lack of proof, as long as the nullity of the sale has not been ascertained by a final and unappealable judgment.

The Ruling's Headnote

In general. In the case of the sale of land that has become non-buildable after the date of the deed, subsequent supplementation of the urban planning certification by one of the contracting parties is permitted, as the nullity provided for by paragraph 2 of art. 30 of Presidential Decree no. 380 of 2001 is a special nullity that can only be invoked by the interested parties who, through their initiative, even individual, can determine the rectification of the defect of lack of precise proof of the urban planning destination of the buildable land, constituting a mere condition for action, until the nullity of the sale has been ascertained with res judicata effect. Consequently, the urban planning destination of an unbuilt plot of land can be demonstrated not only based on a certificate issued prior to and close to the date of the transfer agreement, and in any case within the validity period referred to in paragraph 3 of the aforementioned art. 30, but also by a historical certificate issued after the contract, provided it bears the regulations in force at the time of stipulation.

This passage highlights that the urban planning destination of a plot of land can also be demonstrated through certificates issued after the contract has been signed, provided they comply with the regulatory requirements in force at the time of the sale. This aspect is crucial for ensuring greater security in real estate transactions, especially in a context where urban planning regulations can change over time.

Conclusions

In summary, order no. 19711 of 2024 represents an important step forward in the field of real estate law, clarifying the ways in which a defect related to urban planning certification can be remedied. The parties involved in a sale must be aware of these opportunities to avoid future problems and ensure the legality of transactions. The judgment, therefore, not only provides guidance for the correct management of real estate sales but also offers a useful tool for the protection of contracting parties.