A neighbor's building violation can change the way you live and use your property, but it does not automatically lead to compensation. If a new construction reduces distances, blocks light and air, creates an irregular view, or compromises the concrete use of the property, it is necessary to distinguish the urban planning violation from the right that is infringed upon in the relationship between neighbors.
In this guide, I explain when property devaluation can become relevant, what differences matter between an illegal construction and a construction placed at an unlawful distance, and which remedies may come into play. We will also see why a neighbor's building permit does not close the civil issue and why, conversely, a report to the Municipality does not replace a claim for the protection of property.
Compensable devaluation requires a concrete infringement of property
An irregular structure is not enough, on its own, to prove that your property has suffered compensable damage. The structure may lack a building permit, deviate from the project, or violate an urban planning regulation; to obtain civil protection, however, it is necessary to identify how the structure affects your land and which rule also protects your position as an owner.
The difference depends on the function of the violated rule. Some rules primarily regulate the public interest in the proper development of the territory: they concern, for example, building permits, the urban planning destination of the area, or the methods of work. Others directly regulate relations between neighboring lands, such as distances between buildings or certain openings overlooking another's land.
Legal distances are often the decisive point. When a construction is built too close to the neighboring building according to the civil code or local regulations supplementing that rule, the infringement does not only concern the Municipality. It can affect the enjoyment of the neighboring property and pave the way both for a direct claim aimed at eliminating the unlawful proximity and for a request for compensation.
Conversely, it is not enough to state that the property is "worth less" because the view has worsened or because the construction is unwelcome. If a violation of distances, an unlawful view, an invasion of land, material damage, or another identifiable infringement does not emerge, the decrease in value remains a generic assessment and does not yet identify legally compensable prejudice.
Distances between buildings: which rule really applies
The measure is not always the same. Article 873 of the civil code establishes, as a general rule, three meters between constructions on neighboring lands, unless local regulations impose a greater distance. The current text of the civil code published on Normattiva must therefore be read together with the applicable regulations in the area where the buildings stand.
The distance between buildings does not necessarily coincide with the distance from the boundary. A regulation may only impose a gap between buildings, or require each building to maintain a free strip from the property limit. This difference changes the possible remedy, because it affects how the measurement is calculated and the possibility of building on the boundary or in adherence.
The built structure counts, not the name used to describe it
An upward extension can be as relevant as a new building if it stably modifies the volume, shape, or bulk of the building. Balconies, sheds, enclosed bodies, and structures stably connected to the ground also require concrete verification: it is not decisive whether they are called accessories, light extensions, or ancillary works.
Conversely, elements lacking stable building consistency or completely underground may follow a different rule in calculating distances. The Court of Cassation recalls the need to distinguish the actual structure of the work and the applicable local rule, without solving the problem based solely on the name contained in the building application. A useful overview is in the Court of Cassation's review on the legal limits of property.
The neighbor's permission does not resolve relations between neighbors
The building permit does not grant the right to infringe another's property. A building permit, a certified report, or another administrative act concern the relationship between the builder and the public administration. In the civil relationship, it remains necessary to establish whether the work respects distances and other rules protecting the neighboring land.
This does not mean that every civil dispute leads to demolition. It means that the existence of a building file is not enough to exclude the protection of the neighbor. If the construction violates a rule on distances applicable between the two lands, the civil judge can ascertain that violation even when the intervention has been authorized on an administrative level.
Urban planning violation and civil protection follow different paths
The report to the Municipality serves to have the intervention checked, not to automatically obtain money from the neighbor. Article 27 of Presidential Decree no. 380 of 2001 assigns the director or head of the municipal office supervision over urban-building activity and also contemplates intervention after citizen complaints. The reference is Article 27 of the Consolidated Text on Building.
If the Municipality ascertains irregularities, it can adopt the measures provided for by building regulations, including the suspension of works in the cases indicated by law. This ascertainment does not quantify your damage: for compensation, it remains to be proven that the neighbor's conduct infringed your right or caused financial consequences directly connected to the work.
This distinction avoids two opposite errors. The first is thinking that a building violation always gives the right to the removal requested by the neighbor. The second is giving up civil protection because the Municipality has not yet intervened. The rules on distances affecting neighbor relations and the urban planning rules addressed to the general public can produce different remedies, as recalled by the Court of Cassation's review on building rules and legal distances.
Removal does not depend solely on the unlawful character of the work. If distances are respected, the fact that the structure is irregular on an urban level does not automatically grant the neighbor the right to demand its demolition in civil proceedings. If, instead, a rule governing the space between properties is violated, the claim for reduction to the pristine state may be relevant precisely because it aims to eliminate the infringement between neighbors.
When damage to the value of the property can be recognized
Existence of damage and amount of damage are distinct issues. If a violation of legal distances is ascertained, the jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation normally considers the prejudice to the enjoyment of the land presumable, unless the characteristics of the places or the infringement allow it to be excluded. It is therefore not essential to prove that one has already sold the property at a lower price.
However, this rule does not turn every dispute into an automatic quantification of a percentage of the house's value. The damage may concern the limitation of enjoyment suffered as long as the work remains in place: less light, less privacy, undue interspace, spatial compression, or hindrance in the use of a part of the land. The amount must remain linked to the ascertained infringement and its duration.
Further damage requires specific facts. A failed sale, a reduced rental fee, the cost to eliminate infiltrations, or the impossibility of using a room are not presumed merely because an illegal construction exists. In these cases, it is necessary to link the economic effect to the structure and prove why that prejudice derives precisely from the neighbor's work.
The appraisal does not replace the infringed right. A technician can measure distances, compare the previous state with the current one, and estimate economic effects. However, a real estate appraisal is not enough if the violation of a rule between neighbors or material damage causally traceable to the intervention does not emerge. Similarly, a violation of distances does not lose relevance because the owner has no intention to sell.
Restoration and compensation: two remedies that can coexist
Restoration eliminates the cause of the infringement. In violations of distances, specific performance may require the setback, modification, or removal of the part of the work creating the unlawful proximity. It is not a private penalty to punish the neighbor: it serves to bring relations between properties back within the measure provided by the applicable rule.
Compensation instead looks at the consequences already accrued. Even if the work is removed or modified, the damage deriving from the period in which your property suffered the limitation may remain. The two remedies can therefore be requested together when restoration does not cancel the prejudice that has already occurred.
The choice should not start from an abstract percentage of depreciation. It changes greatly if the problem concerns a wall that is too close, an upward extension, a balcony creating a view, a shed without a permit but distant from the building, an infiltration, or the material occupation of the land. First, the violated rule is identified, then the damage is assessed.
To make the situation clear, it is useful to keep dated photographs, received communications, available plans regarding the intervention, and documents showing the use of the property before and after construction. If you complain about a compromised sale or lease, proposals, negotiations, and correspondence allowing the economic loss to be linked to the work also become relevant.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I claim compensation even if I have not sold the property?
Yes, the sale is not necessary to protect a violation of legal distances. Damage to the enjoyment of property can be relevant even without a completed sale. If you instead request compensation for a reduced sale price or a lost deal, you must prove with concrete elements the link between that economic effect and the neighbor's work.
Does the neighbor's building permit prevent contesting the work?
No, not necessarily. The building permit concerns the intervention vis-à-vis the administration and does not prove by itself compliance with distances or other rights of the neighbor. For civil protection, the applicable rule between the two lands and the way the work was concretely built count.
Can I request the demolition of any illegal work?
No, civil demolition is not automatic. If the work violates distances or other rules set for the direct protection of neighbor relations, reduction to the pristine state can be requested. If the irregularity concerns only the urban planning relationship with the Municipality, the neighbor does not acquire the right to obtain removal for this sole reason.
Must I prove the exact drop in the house's value with an appraisal?
Not always to prove that damage exists. In case of violation of distances, prejudice to enjoyment can normally be presumed within the limits indicated by jurisprudence. The appraisal remains useful for measuring the work and contributing to quantification. For further damage, however, specific proof of the causal link is essential.
Does the report to the Municipality automatically get me compensation?
No, they are different tools. The report allows the administration to verify urban-building compliance and adopt the provided measures. Compensation instead requires that the work has infringed a protected position of yours and that the damage is traceable to that neighbor's conduct.
References and First Guidance
To delve deeper into the mentioned regulations, you can consult the civil code on Normattiva, Article 27 of Presidential Decree no. 380 of 2001, and the Court of Cassation's review on distances and building rules.
The right question starts from the work and the violated rule: it is necessary to distinguish the violation that interests municipal control from the infringement affecting your property and the damage actually produced. If you want to clarify these differences regarding your property in Milan, you can contact me.