Condominium Assembly Convening: The Court of Cassation and the Non-Derogability of Art. 66 of the Implementing Provisions of the Civil Code (Order 16399/2025)
Condominium management is a complex area where adherence to procedures is crucial to avoid disputes. The proper convening of the assembly is of paramount importance, as it forms the basis for the legitimacy of decisions. A recent Order from the Court of Cassation, No. 16399 of June 18, 2025, has provided a clear interpretation on the non-derogability of communication methods for this requirement, reaffirming a fundamental principle to protect collegiality and the interests of co-owners. Let's delve into this important decision and its implications.
The Centrality of Art. 66 of the Implementing Provisions of the Civil Code in Convening
Article 66, paragraph 3, of the implementing provisions of the Civil Code is the reference norm for the methods of convening condominium assemblies. This provision does not allow for imaginative interpretations, ensuring that every co-owner is informed and can participate. The communication methods expressly provided for are:
- registered mail;
- certified electronic mail (PEC);
- fax;
- hand delivery.
The Ruling of the Court of Cassation: A Non-Derogable Principle
Order No. 16399/2025 of the Court of Cassation, Second Civil Section, presided over and drafted by Dr. A. Scarpa, originated from an appeal between S. and C., following a judgment by the Court of Appeal of Milan. The Supreme Court quashed and remanded, forcefully reaffirming the key principle in this matter. Here is the ruling of the judgment:
In matters of condominium assembly, Art. 66, paragraph 3, of the implementing provisions of the Civil Code, by prescribing specific forms of convening (registered mail, certified electronic mail, fax, or hand delivery), lays down a non-derogable discipline to protect collegiality and therefore the fundamental interests of the condominium, thus excluding the validity of any different regulation expressed by private autonomy that provides for alternative methods of transmitting the notice that are unsuitable for documenting its delivery to the recipient's address, such as, in this case, a simple email message.This statement is crucial. The Court of Cassation emphasizes that the discipline of Art. 66, paragraph 3, of the implementing provisions of the Civil Code is a "non-derogable" norm. This means that neither the condominium rules, nor a resolution, nor a practice can validate different convening methods. The essential point is the transmission method's ability to "document its delivery." Simple email does not offer such a guarantee, as it can end up in spam or not arrive, without certain proof of receipt, unlike PEC which provides receipts comparable to those of registered mail.
Practical Implications and Risks for Administrators
This ruling has significant repercussions. For administrators, any convening carried out by methods other than those listed in Art. 66 of the implementing provisions of the Civil Code is invalid, carrying the risk of annulment of the resolutions adopted. Annulment, which can be requested by any absent, dissenting, or abstaining co-owner within 30 days, is a serious problem. An annulled assembly means repeating the entire process, with a waste of time and resources. It is therefore essential that administrators scrupulously adhere to the legal provisions. Even an agreement between co-owners to use simple email would be legally ineffective, as it would derogate from a mandatory norm.
Conclusions: Protection of Collegiality and Legal Certainty
Order 16399/2025 reaffirms a principle of legal civilization: the protection of collegiality and the fundamental interests of the condominium. The clarity of the convening rules is not mere formalism, but the guarantee that all participants can fully exercise their rights. For co-owners, this judgment is a warning to verify the regularity of the convenings. For administrators, it is a reminder of professional diligence and the rigorous application of the law. In a context of increasing digitalization, the Court of Cassation reminds us that, in the legal field, form is often substance, especially to ensure participation and the validity of collective decisions. Relying on legal professionals experienced in condominium law is always the wisest choice.
