The Condominium Administrator and Extraordinary Works: The Court of Cassation Clarifies Surveillance Duties with Order No. 16290 of 2025

The management of a condominium is a complex task, requiring attention and professionalism, especially when dealing with extraordinary maintenance works. These works, often costly and delicate, involve the entire condominium community and require careful supervision. But what is the exact scope of the administrator's responsibilities in these contexts? The Court of Cassation, with Order No. 16290 of June 17, 2025, offers a fundamental clarification, emphasizing the duty of surveillance incumbent upon the administrator, even in the presence of a contractor and a works supervisor.

The Crucial Role of the Administrator in Condominium Management

The condominium administrator, a central figure in the life of any shared building, is vested with a series of well-defined attributions and duties by Articles 1130 and 1131 of the Civil Code. These articles outline a role of management and representation that goes far beyond the mere collection of condominium fees. Among their primary functions are the preservation of the common parts of the building and the execution of assembly resolutions. When the assembly decides to undertake extraordinary maintenance works, such as facade renovation or roof repair, the administrator must manage a complex project that often involves awarding a contract to external companies and appointing a works supervisor. It is precisely in this context that questions arise about the extent of their duty of oversight.

The Cassation Court's Ruling: A Beacon on Responsibility

Order No. 16290 of 2025, issued by the Second Section of the Court of Cassation, in a case pitting C. (M. A.) against A. (C. C.), quashes and remands a previous decision by the Court of Appeal of Ancona dated February 3, 2020, forcefully reaffirming a core principle. The Supreme Court clarified that the administrator cannot simply delegate the task and disengage. Here is the full headnote that guided this important decision:

In matters of condominiums, the administrator tasked with extraordinary activities concerning the awarding of a contract for building maintenance is not exempt from the duty to supervise the contractor and the works supervisor, as it is their responsibility, as the representative of the condominium client and considering the specific powers conferred by the assembly, to control the progress of the works, verify their status, ascertain that the execution of the work proceeds within the agreed terms and conditions, make or deny payments based on the correspondence of the completed work to the quantitative or qualitative provisions of the contractual clauses, and promptly inform the co-owners of any difficulties that may arise in the execution of the contract that are objectively capable of affecting the management relationship.

This headnote is of crucial importance. It means that, even if the administrator has entrusted the works to a specialized company and appointed a works supervisor for technical oversight, their role as guarantor and representative of the condominium does not end. The administrator must continue to actively monitor, not only the company's performance but also the effectiveness of the works supervisor's oversight. It is their duty to ensure that the execution of the work proceeds in line with the contract and with industry standards, also managing payments based on actual progress and the quality of the works. Furthermore, it is essential that they promptly communicate any problems or difficulties that may arise to the co-owners, which could affect the relationship or costs.

Practical Implications for Condominiums and Administrators

This ruling has significant implications for both administrators and co-owners. For administrators, the judgment serves as a warning not to underestimate the commitment required in managing extraordinary works. It is not enough to sign contracts; constant presence and punctual verification are necessary. This implies:

• Assiduous control over the progress of the works and their compliance with the project and specifications.
• Verification of the regularity of certifications and technical documentation.
• Prudent management of payments, strictly linking them to the actual progress and quality of the works.
• Transparent and proactive communication with co-owners regarding any critical aspects or deviations from the plan.

For co-owners, this decision strengthens their position. They have the right to expect diligent action and constant supervision from the administrator. In case of problems related to extraordinary works, the ruling offers a stronger basis for holding the administrator accountable for their conduct, should they have failed to fulfill their surveillance duties. This principle aligns with the case law that, as also recalled by previous headnotes (No. 25251 of 2008 and No. 24058 of 2022), tends to strengthen the administrator's responsibility regarding the correct management and preservation of common areas.

Conclusions: A Call to Diligence

Order No. 16290 of 2025 by the Court of Cassation is a highly significant ruling, underscoring the importance of diligence and responsibility of the condominium administrator in managing extraordinary works. This is not a mere bureaucratic burden but a substantial obligation to protect the interests of the co-owners, which translates into active and non-delegable surveillance. For administrators, this means adopting a proactive and meticulous approach; for co-owners, it represents an additional guarantee of the correct execution of works and the safeguarding of their property's value. Transparency and professionalism remain the pillars of effective and legally compliant condominium management.