Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Monday, December 6, 2010
Difference Between Baker And Confectioner
strike by public transport throughout Italy December 10, 2010
WARNING STRIKE CANCELLED REGULAR PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Friday, December 10 2010 will be a difficult day for transport by public transport. The unions FILT CGIL, CISL Fit, Uiltrasporti, UGL Transport, Great Bear Transport, Faisa, Fast have proclaims a 24-hour strike that will begin Thursday, December 9 to 21 and will end at the same time the next day .
The agitation will affect not only the Trenitalia train-Fs but also the local public transportation that stops at the same time subject to the guarantee ranges from 6 to 9 and from 18 to 20. Then a metro stop and bus stop with the territorial arrangements differ depending on the region. There is however the
possiilità that the strike is reduced to 4 hours until the morning of December 10, for action by the Welfare Committee of the strike that launched the "crunch".
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Lifespan Hitachi Plasma
Deductions energy savings in 2011, 55% for thermal plants and renovation of buildings and Racking
elapsed since the room is also to be endorsed this week by the Committee on the Budget Stability Law which also for 2011 will ensure the tax deduction of 55% on construction projects for energy saving . The only news is the fact that deductions will be spread over 10 years instead of 5.
speeches on which you can enjoy 55% deduction for 2011:
-install panels to produce hot water household. These fall under the deductible expenses supply and installation of all equipment, thermal, mechanical and electronic equipment as well as all the engineering work and masonry
needed to implement the system.
- action on so-called "opaque structures" horizontal (ie roofs and floors) and vertical (ie the external walls) surrounding the heated volume to the exterior or unheated spaces.
-replacement of windows and window frames are considered ancillary deductible even structures that affect heat loss such as blinds, imposte e persiane. Per le spese di sostituzione delle finestre, comprensive di infi ssi, in singole unità immobiliari, non occorre presentare l’attestato di certificazione energetica o di qualificazione energetica
-sostituzione, integrale o parziale, dei sistemi di climatizzazione invernale esistenti con impianti dotati di caldaie a condensazione oppure con impianti di riscaldamento che sfruttano pompe di calore ad alta efficienza o impianti geotermici. Ricordatevi che per la sostituzione dei sistemi di climatizzazione non è più necessario il certificato di qualificazione energetica previsto per gli altri interventi. Non sono invece detraibili le spese per la posa di impianti in edifici che ne erano sprovvisti.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Perth Gay Cruising Areas
ghost houses by 2011, even abuse
Obbligo di accatastamento per immobili e case fantasma non censite al catasto compresi gli abusi edilizi per tutti coloro che godono dei diritti reali sulla proprietà. Lo prevede il d.l. 78 del 31 maggio 2010 nell' articolo 19. In pratica i proprietari che sospettino di possedere un edificio non dichiarato, quindi compreso un abuso edilizio, devono accatastarlo all' ufficio del territorio o all' ufficio tecnico del proprio comune entro il 31 dicembre 2010 .
L'abuso edilizio dichiarato non da in ogni caso vita ad una sanatoria o ad un condono , rimange la violazione con l'obbligo della demolizione and criminal charges where appropriate.
a technical writing should be instructed to 'register which will present the new project to' land registry office. After the complaint to the land will pay the tax burden starting from 'the year of construction, maximum 5 years past, with the tax rebates provided by law for this type of operation (penalties reduced to 12.5%).
If not received within the Office of the stacking area will over time to estimate an income of alleged plot (based on the evidence available in or register with any visits) and add to the administrative penalty.
How Long Does It Take To Correct Gracenote
Court of Justice, sec. III, September 30, 2010, proc. C-314/09
2 The reference was made in a dispute between the City of Graz [City of Graz (Austria)], by one hand, and Strabag AG, the AG and Teerag-Asdag Bauunternehmung Granit GesmbH (together referred to as' the company Strabag and Others) on the other, as a result of custody unlawful for a public contract by of these municipalities.
legal framework
3 I 'considering' third and sixth of Directive 89/665 state:
4 La direttiva suddetta dispone, all’art. 1, n. 1, quanto segue:
«Gli Stati membri prendono i provvedimenti necessari per garantire che, per quanto riguarda le procedures for awarding public contracts covered by Directives 71/305/EEC, 77/62/EEC and 92/50/EEC, decisions taken by contracting authorities may be reviewed effectively and, in particular, as rapidly as possible in accordance the conditions laid down in the following articles, in particular, Article 2, paragraph 7, if infringed Community law on public procurement or national rules implementing that law.
Article 5. 2, nos. 1 and 5-7 of Directive 89/665 provides:
1. Member States shall ensure that the measures taken concerning the procedures specified in Article 1 prevedano i poteri che permettano di:
a) prendere con la massima sollecitudine e con procedura d’urgenza provvedimenti provvisori intesi a riparare la violazione o impedire che altri danni siano causati agli interessi coinvolti, compresi i provvedimenti intesi a sospendere o a far sospendere la procedura di aggiudicazione pubblica di un appalto o l’esecuzione di qualsiasi decisione presa dalle autorità aggiudicatrici;
b) annullare o far annullare le decisioni illegittime, compresa la soppressione delle specificazioni tecniche, economiche o finanziarie discriminatorie figuranti nei documenti di gara, nei capitolati d’oneri o in ogni altro documento connesso with the contract award procedure in question;
c) award damages to persons injured by the breach.
(...)
5. Member States may provide that, where damages are claimed on the grounds that a decision was taken unlawfully, the first thing [the contested decision must be annulled by a court having the necessary expertise for this purpose].
6. The exercise of the powers referred to in paragraph 1 on a contract concluded subsequent award shall be determined by national law.
In addition, except in cases where a decision must be set aside prior to the award of damages, a Member State may provide that, after the conclusion of a contract following its award, the powers of the body responsible for review procedures shall be limited to awarding damages to any person harmed by a violation.
7. Member States shall ensure that decisions taken by bodies responsible for review procedures can be implemented effectively. "
6 The right dell’Unione in materia di appalti pubblici è stato trasposto, nel Land Stiria, dalla legge del 1998 disciplinante l’affidamento degli appalti pubblici (Steiermärkisches Vergabegesetz 1998; in prosieguo: il «StVergG»).
7 L’art. 115, n. 1, del StVergG dispone quanto segue:
«In caso di violazione colpevole della presente legge o dei regolamenti per la sua applicazione, perpetrata da organi del soggetto preposto alla procedura di affidamento, il candidato od offerente pretermesso ha, nei confronti dell’amministrazione appaltante cui è imputabile il comportamento di tali organi, un diritto al risarcimento delle spese connesse the presentation of the offer and those resulting from participation in the procurement procedure. The claims, including those relating to the possible loss of income, must be brought an action before the ordinary courts. "
Article 8. 1298 of the Austrian Civil Code (Allgemeines Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch 'the ABGB) provides:
"He who claims to have found no fault, unable to settle the obligation imposed on him by a contract or by law, is required to provide supporting evidence. If he, by virtue of a contractual agreement, is only liable in case of serious misconduct must also demonstrate the absence of that condition. "
Article 9. ABGB 1299 provides:
"He who exercises a public office, an art, a profession or trade, or who voluntarily and without the need is in charge of managing a business whose realization requires specific knowledge or uncommon diligence, he shows that they felt in the possession of the necessary diligence and uncommon knowledge required, so it's bound to answer any lack thereof. However, if his lack of experience was known to the person who entrusted him the job or he could have become acquainted with ordinary care, it also incurs a fault that may be charged. "
The facts of the case and the questions
10 In 1998 the City of Graz has issued a call for tender by open procedure at EU level for the production and supply of hot mix asphalt in accordance with the provisions of StVergG. The notice, published in the Official Journal of the European Communities and the Grazer Zeitung, noted as the place of performance "Graz, Austria 'and provides, in a column titled" Brief description (type of contract, general characteristics, purpose of the work or construction), supply of hot mix asphalt during the year 1999. The notice also stated under the heading "Terms of the implementation of the performance ', the following dates:" Start: 1 March 1999 end: December 20, 1999. "
11 fourteen bids were filed. The best was the one presented by the construction Held & Franck Bau GmbH (hereinafter "HFB"). According to the information contained in the application reference, if that company had been excluded, should have been granted the joint supply companies Strabag and Others
12 The HFB had attached to its offer in a letter which informed, "integrative way," that its new facility for the asphalt mix, which was to be constructed in the following weeks in the Municipality of Großwilfersdorf , would become operational from May 17, 1999. The companies Strabag and Others unaware of the existence of this letter.
13 On May 5, 1999 the company Strabag and Others brought before the Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark (Commission di controllo sugli appalti pubblici del Land Stiria) un ricorso nel quale hanno fatto valere che la HFB non disponeva, nel Land Stiria, di impianti per la fabbricazione di conglomerato bituminoso a caldo, ciò che metteva l’impresa suddetta nell’impossibilità tecnica di eseguire l’appalto in questione. Pertanto, a loro avviso, l’offerta di tale impresa doveva essere esclusa.
14 Le società Strabag e a. hanno parallelamente proposto una domanda di provvedimenti provvisori, la quale è stata accolta dal Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark con ordinanza 10 maggio 1999, che ha vietato alla Stadt Graz di procedere all’aggiudicazione dell’appalto in attesa della decisione the merits.
15 By decision of 10 June 1999, the Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark has fully rejected the appeal of the companies Strabag and Others and, in particular, questions designed to obtain the opening of a procedure for review of the HFB and exclusion from the race. It held that the company had a permit holder carrying on asphalt and that the claim that the mixing plant hot mix should already be in existence at the time of opening of tenders would be disproportionate and contrary to the object of the current uses of the trade.
16 Il 14 giugno 1999 la Stadt Graz ha aggiudicato l’appalto alla HFB.
17 Con decisione in data 9 ottobre 2002 il Verwaltungsgerichtshof, a seguito di un ricorso proposto dalle società Strabag e a., ha annullato la decisione del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark a motivo della difformità dell’offerta della HFB rispetto al bando di gara, in quanto, sebbene il periodo fissato per la fornitura della prestazione si estendesse dal 1° marzo al 20 dicembre 1999, l’impresa suddetta aveva potuto disporre del suo nuovo impianto di miscelazione dell’asfalto soltanto a partire dal 17 maggio 1999.
18 L’Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat für die Steiermark (Consiglio amministrativo indipendente per il Land Stiria), il quale nel 2002 è subentrato nelle competenze prima esercitate dal Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, ha statuito, con decisione in data 23 aprile 2003, che, a causa di una violazione del StVergG, l’appalto non era stato legittimamente attribuito dalla Stadt Graz.
19 Le società Strabag e a. hanno proposto dinanzi ai giudici ordinari un’azione diretta ad ottenere la condanna della Stadt Graz al pagamento a loro favore della somma di EUR 300 000 a titolo di risarcimento danni. A sostegno della loro azione, esse hanno fatto valere che l’offerta della HFB avrebbe dovuto essere esclusa a motivo di un vizio insanabile e che di conseguenza avrebbe dovuto essere accolta la loro offerta. La Stadt Graz avrebbe agito colpevolmente astenendosi dal constatare l’incompatibilità dell’offerta della HFB con le clausole del bando di gara. La decisione del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark non sarebbe idonea ad esonerare da responsabilità la Stadt Graz, la quale avrebbe agito a proprio rischio.
20 La Stadt Graz ha fatto valere, per parte sua, che essa era vincolata dalla decisione del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark e che l’eventuale illegittimità di tale decisione era imputabile al Land Steiermark, cui andava ricondotto l’operato del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark. By contrast, the bodies of the municipality that would not have committed any culpable action.
21 The court of first instance, with a preliminary decision, said the claim for damages based company Strabag and Others, believing that the City of Graz had acted criminally by failing to check the bids and awarding the contract the HFB, despite the obvious defect vitiating its tender, during the period allowed for appeal against the decision of Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark.
22 That decision was upheld on appeal. The court of appeal, however, said their sentenza era impugnabile mediante ricorso per cassazione [«Revision»] ordinario, tenuto conto della mancanza di giurisprudenza dell’Oberster Gerichtshof in merito alla responsabilità dell’amministrazione aggiudicatrice per una condotta colpevole in una situazione caratterizzata, come nel caso di specie, dall’esistenza, alla data dell’aggiudicazione dell’appalto al miglior offerente, di una decisione del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark di convalida del comportamento tenuto dall’amministrazione stessa.
23 Il giudice d’appello ha ritenuto che, sebbene i giudici ordinari fossero vincolati dalla constatazione di illegittimità contenuta nella decisione April 23, 2003 Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat für die Steiermark and had been satisfied that there is a causal link between the unlawful conduct of Stadt Graz and the damage suffered by the companies Strabag and Others, however, it was necessary to examine the question of the existence of a culpability on the part of the Stadt Graz, resulting from its decision to award the contract to the HFB early as June 14, 1999, regardless of the fact, not considered in the decision of 10 June 1999 Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, that the letter accompanying the offer of this company indicated that it was unable to meet the deadlines for the performance of concerned.
24 The City of Graz was brought before Oberster, an appeal against the ruling on appeal.
25 First, the national court has doubts as to whether art. 115, No 1 of StVergG Directive 89/665. Referring to the judgments of 14 October 2004 in Case C-275/03 Commission v Portugal, and 10 January 2008 in Case C-70/06 Commission v Portugal (ECR. I-1), it is uncertain whether it should be considered contrasting any national legislation with the directive that in one way or another bidder makes the right to compensation the existence of guilt on the part of the contracting authority, or whether the conflict exists only in the case of national legislation on the tenderer that the burden of proof of that guilt.
26 The national court points out in this regard, that Article. ABGB 1298 by reversal of the burden of proof, under which the responsibility of the contracting authority for the operation of its organs is assumed. In addition, the administration can not raise the lack of their individual abilities, given that his responsibilities would correspond to that of a subject esperto, ai sensi dell’art. 1299 dell’ABGB. Tuttavia, la Stadt Graz potrebbe validamente assolvere l’onere della prova che le incombe qualora essa fosse stata vincolata, in modo effettivo e pieno, all’osservanza della decisione formalmente definitiva emessa dal Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark.
27 In secondo luogo, supponendo che la direttiva 89/665 non osti ad una normativa nazionale quale quella in questione nella causa principale, il giudice del rinvio – che, al pari del Verwaltungsgerichtshof e del giudice d’appello intervenuti nella presente controversia, nega che l’amministrazione aggiudicatrice sia vincolata da una decisione quale quella emessa il 10 giugno 1999 by Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark - wonders if the argument that the administration was not bound by that decision and could have or even had to award the contract to another tenderer is not a conflict with the objective proclaimed art. 2, No 7 of that directive, the effective implementation of decisions taken by bodies responsible for appeal procedures.
28 Thirdly, assuming that the second question should be answered in the affirmative, the national court finds that companies Strabag and Others and the appeal court censor the City of Graz as this would have awarded the contract the HFB regardless of the fact - not considered by the Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark in its decision of 10 June 1999 - that the company was unable, according to its own guidelines, to perform the contract in question within the prescribed period the tender notice. In those circumstances the national court asks, in the light of Article. 2, No 7 of Directive 89/665, if the contracting authority, even if it were bound by the decision taken by a body such as the Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, or even could, however, have examined the accuracy of that decision and / or exhaustive nature of the assessment on which this was based.
29 In those circumstances, the Oberster Gerichtshof decided to stay proceedings and refer the following questions:
2) If the answer to the first question, whether Article. 2, No 7 of Directive 89/665 (...) (...) should be interpreted as meaning that, under the obligation imposed by that provision to ensure the effective implementation of decisions taken in the procedures for review, the decision to supervisory authority on public procurement should be recognized binding to all the participants in the proceeding and, therefore, also the purchasing entity.
3) If the answer to the second question, whether, pursuant to art. 2, No 7 of Directive 89/665 (...) (...), the contracting authority has the power, or even the obligation, to disregard a final decision of a supervisory authority on public procurement and, if so, what are the assumptions underlying them. "
The questions
The first question
30 By its first question, the national court is essentially asking whether Directive 89/665 must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, which makes the right to compensation as a result of a breach of the rules on public procurement by a 'character to the contracting authority guilty of such violation, if the application of the legislation in question is centered on a presumption of guilt on the part of this administration, and the impossibility for it to rely on the absence of their individual capabilities and Thus, a lack of subjective culpability of the alleged violation.
31 In this regard, it should first be noted that Article. 1 No 1 of Directive 89/665 requires Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure the existence of effective procedures and, in particular, as rapidly as possible against the decisions of contracting authorities have "violated" the right of ' EU public procurement or national rules transposing it. The third
32 As regards, in particular, mode of action seeking damages, Article. 2, No 1 bed. c) of Directive 89/665 provides that Member States shall ensure that the measures taken concerning the review of Article. 1 of the directive provides for the powers to grant such compensation to persons harmed by an infringement.
33 However, Directive 89/665 provides only the minimum requirements that the review procedures established in national legal systems must meet in order to ensure compliance with the requirements of EU law on public procurement ( see, inter alia, 27 febbraio 2003, causa C-327/00, Santex, Racc. pag. I-1877, punto 47, e 19 giugno 2003, causa C-315/01, GAT, Racc. pag. I-6351, punto 45). In mancanza di una disposizione specifica in merito, spetta quindi all’ordinamento giuridico interno di ogni Stato membro determinare le misure necessarie per garantire che le procedure di ricorso consentano effettivamente di accordare un risarcimento ai soggetti lesi da una violazione della normativa sugli appalti pubblici (v., per analogia, sentenza GAT, cit., punto 46).
34 Pertanto, se indubbiamente l’attuazione dell’art. 2, n. 1, lett. c), della direttiva 89/665 rientra, in linea di principio, nell’autonomia procedurale Member States, which is bounded by the principles of equivalence and effectiveness, it must nonetheless determine whether that rule, interpreted in the light of the context in which the general objective and is part of the means of application seeking approval of a compensation, which precludes a national provision such as that at issue in this case makes the conditions set out in paragraph 30 above, the granting of such compensation to the character guilty of violation of the law on public procurement contract by the contracting authority.
35 In this regard, it is important to note, first, that the wording of Articles. 1 No 1 and 2 nn. 1, 5 and 6 and the sixth 'recital' of Directive 89/665 does not in any way indicate that the violation of procurement rules to give rise to a claim for damages in favor of the injured party must have special features, such as that to be related to a fault, alleged or proven, the contracting authority, or that it does not fall under any cause of exemption from liability.
36 This analysis is supported by the context and objective means of general application seeking approval of compensation provided for in Directive 89/665.
37 It is settled giurisprudenza, gli Stati membri, pur essendo tenuti a prevedere mezzi di ricorso che consentano di ottenere l’annullamento di una decisione dell’amministrazione aggiudicatrice contraria alla normativa sugli appalti pubblici, sono legittimati, in vista dell’obiettivo di celerità perseguito dalla direttiva 89/665, a prevedere per questo tipo di ricorsi termini ragionevoli da osservarsi a pena di decadenza, e ciò per evitare che i candidati e gli offerenti possano in qualsiasi momento allegare violazioni della normativa suddetta, obbligando così l’amministrazione aggiudicatrice a riprendere l’intera procedura al fine di rimediare a tali violazioni [v. in tal senso, in particolare, sentenze 12 dicembre 2002, causa C-470/99, Universale-Bau and Others, ECR. I-11617, paragraphs 74-78; Santex, cit., Paragraphs 51 and 52, October 11, 2007, Case C-241/06, Lämmerzahl ECR. I-8415, paragraphs 50 and 51, and January 28, 2010, Case C-406/08, Uniplex (UK), not yet reported, paragraph 38].
38 Furthermore, Article. 2, No 6, second paragraph, of Directive 89/665 gives the Member States to provide that, after the conclusion of the contract following its award, the powers of the body responsible for appeal procedures are limited to an award of .
39 In this context, the remedy provided for by compensation. 2, No 1 bed. c) of Directive 89/665 may, where appropriate, an alternative procedural compatible with the principle of effectiveness, the underlying objective of effectiveness of the actions pursued by the Directive [see to that effect, inter alia, Uniplex (UK), cit., paragraph 40], only if the possibility of recognizing compensation for breach of public procurement rules are not subject - just as there are other remedies provided for by Article. 2, No 1 - the finding of wrongful conduct required by the contracting authority.
40 As noted by the European Commission, it matters little in this regard that, unlike the national legislation considered in the judgment October 14, 2004, Commission v Portugal, the legislation at issue in this case do not impose the burden on the victim of proving the existence of a fault of the contracting authority, but requires it to overcome the presumption of guilt imposed on it by limiting the reasons given for this purpose.
41 The latter legislation also creates the risk that the agency affected by an unlawful decision of a contracting aggiudicatrice venga comunque privato del diritto di ottenere un risarcimento per il danno causato da tale decisione, nel caso in cui l’amministrazione suddetta riesca a vincere la presunzione di colpevolezza su di essa gravante. Orbene, secondo quanto risulta dalla presente domanda di pronuncia pregiudiziale, e così come confermato dalle discussioni svoltesi all’udienza, una simile eventualità non risulta esclusa nel caso di specie, tenuto conto della possibilità per la Stadt Graz di invocare il carattere scusabile dell’errore di diritto da essa asseritamente commesso, a motivo dell’intervento della decisione 10 giugno 1999 del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, che ha rigettato il ricorso delle società Strabag e a.
42 At the very least, the agency that runs the risk, by virtue of such legislation, to obtain compensation only belatedly, given the length of time as may be necessary for the investigation of a civil nature intended guilty of the alleged violation.
43 However, in either case, the situation would be contrary to Directive 89/665, as set out in Article. 1 No 1, and the third 'whereas' the latter, which is to ensure the existence of effective remedies and as rapidly as possible against decisions taken by the authorities in breach of procurement rules.
44 should also be noted that, even assuming that, in this case, the City of Graz might have held, in June 1999 to be required, noting the inherent efficiency of any proceedings for the award of public to give immediate effect to the decision of 10 June 1999 Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, without awaiting the expiry of the deadline for appeal of that decision, the fact remains that, as stated by the Commission at the hearing, the determination of the merits a claim for compensation proposta dall’offerente pretermesso a seguito dell’annullamento di tale decisione da parte di un giudice amministrativo non può, per parte sua, essere subordinato – in contrasto con il tenore, l’economia sistematica e la finalità delle disposizioni della direttiva 89/665 contemplanti il diritto ad ottenere tale risarcimento – ad una valutazione del carattere colpevole del comportamento dell’amministrazione aggiudicatrice chiamata in causa.
45 Tenuto conto delle considerazioni che precedono, occorre risolvere la prima questione dichiarando che la direttiva 89/665 deve essere interpretata nel senso che essa osta ad una normativa nazionale, la quale subordini il diritto ad ottenere compensation by reason of a breach of the rules on public procurement by the contracting authority in character guilty of such violation, even if the application of the legislation in question is centered on a presumption of guilt on the part of the administration above, and the impossibility for it to rely on the absence of their individual capabilities and, therefore, a lack of subjective culpability of the alleged violation.
The second and third questions
46 Given the answer to the first question, it is necessary to answer the other two questions.
Costs
47 in respect of the main parties, these proceedings are pending before the national court, which is responsible for the decision on costs. The costs incurred by other parties to submit comments to the Court are not recoverable.
For these reasons, the Court (Third Chamber) hereby:
The Council Directive of 21 December 1989, 89/665/EEC on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of procedures concerning the award degli appalti pubblici di forniture e di lavori, come modificata dalla direttiva del Consiglio 18 giugno 1992, 92/50/CEE, deve essere interpretata nel senso che essa osta ad una normativa nazionale, la quale subordini il diritto ad ottenere un risarcimento a motivo di una violazione della disciplina sugli appalti pubblici da parte di un’amministrazione
JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber) September 30, 2010 (*)
'Directive 89/665/EEC - Public contracts - Review procedures - Action for damages - Award unlawful - national rules on liability based on a presumption of guilt of the contracting authority "
In Case C-314/09,
concerning the request for a preliminary ruling under Article. 234 EC from Gerichtshof (Austria), by decision of 2 July 2009, received on 7 August 2009 in the Stadt Graz
against
Strabag AG,
Teerag- Asdag AG,
Bauunternehmung Granit GesmbH,
with party:
Land Steiermark,
THE COURT (Third Chamber),
composed. K. Lenaerts (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, Mr. E. Juhász, G. Arestis, T. and D. von Danwitz Šváby, giudici,
avvocato generale: sig.ra V. Trstenjak
cancelliere: sig. K. Malacek, amministratore
vista la fase scritta del procedimento e in seguito all’udienza del 24 giugno 2010,
considerate le osservazioni presentate:
- per la Stadt Graz, dall’avv. K. Kocher, Rechtsanwalt;
- per la Strabag AG, la Teerag-Asdag AG e la Bauunternehmung Granit GesmbH, dall’avv. W. Mecenovic, Rechtsanwalt;
- per il Land Steiermark, dall’avv. A.R. Lerchbaumer, Rechtsanwalt
- the Austrian Government, by. M. Fruhmann, acting as Agent,
- for the European Commission, by D. B. Schima, C. Zadra, acting as Agents,
having decided, after hearing the Advocate General, to judge the case without an opinion
gives the following
Judgement
a request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Articles. 1 No 1 and 2 nos. 1 bed. c) and 7 of Council Directive of 21 December 1989, 89/665/EEC on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures concerning the award of public supply and public works ( OJ L 395, p.. 33), as amended by Council Directive of 18 June 1992, 92/50/EEC (OJ L 209, p. 1. hereinafter "Directive 89/665").
2 The reference was made in a dispute between the City of Graz [City of Graz (Austria)], by one hand, and Strabag AG, the AG and Teerag-Asdag Bauunternehmung Granit GesmbH (together referred to as' the company Strabag and Others) on the other, as a result of custody unlawful for a public contract by of these municipalities.
legal framework
Union law
3 I 'considering' third and sixth of Directive 89/665 state:
«(...) 's opening up public procurement to Community competition necessitates a substantial increase in the guarantees of transparency and non-discrimination and (...) it is necessary, affinché essa sia seguita da effetti concreti, che esistano mezzi di ricorso efficaci e rapidi in caso di violazione del diritto comunitario in materia di appalti pubblici o delle norme nazionali che recepiscono tale diritto;
(...)
(...) considerando la necessità di garantire in tutti gli Stati membri procedure adeguate che permettano l’annullamento delle decisioni illegittime e l’indennizzo delle persone lese da una violazione».
(...) considerando la necessità di garantire in tutti gli Stati membri procedure adeguate che permettano l’annullamento delle decisioni illegittime e l’indennizzo delle persone lese da una violazione».
4 La direttiva suddetta dispone, all’art. 1, n. 1, quanto segue:
«Gli Stati membri prendono i provvedimenti necessari per garantire che, per quanto riguarda le procedures for awarding public contracts covered by Directives 71/305/EEC, 77/62/EEC and 92/50/EEC, decisions taken by contracting authorities may be reviewed effectively and, in particular, as rapidly as possible in accordance the conditions laid down in the following articles, in particular, Article 2, paragraph 7, if infringed Community law on public procurement or national rules implementing that law.
Article 5. 2, nos. 1 and 5-7 of Directive 89/665 provides:
1. Member States shall ensure that the measures taken concerning the procedures specified in Article 1 prevedano i poteri che permettano di:
a) prendere con la massima sollecitudine e con procedura d’urgenza provvedimenti provvisori intesi a riparare la violazione o impedire che altri danni siano causati agli interessi coinvolti, compresi i provvedimenti intesi a sospendere o a far sospendere la procedura di aggiudicazione pubblica di un appalto o l’esecuzione di qualsiasi decisione presa dalle autorità aggiudicatrici;
b) annullare o far annullare le decisioni illegittime, compresa la soppressione delle specificazioni tecniche, economiche o finanziarie discriminatorie figuranti nei documenti di gara, nei capitolati d’oneri o in ogni altro documento connesso with the contract award procedure in question;
c) award damages to persons injured by the breach.
(...)
5. Member States may provide that, where damages are claimed on the grounds that a decision was taken unlawfully, the first thing [the contested decision must be annulled by a court having the necessary expertise for this purpose].
6. The exercise of the powers referred to in paragraph 1 on a contract concluded subsequent award shall be determined by national law.
In addition, except in cases where a decision must be set aside prior to the award of damages, a Member State may provide that, after the conclusion of a contract following its award, the powers of the body responsible for review procedures shall be limited to awarding damages to any person harmed by a violation.
7. Member States shall ensure that decisions taken by bodies responsible for review procedures can be implemented effectively. "
National law
6 The right dell’Unione in materia di appalti pubblici è stato trasposto, nel Land Stiria, dalla legge del 1998 disciplinante l’affidamento degli appalti pubblici (Steiermärkisches Vergabegesetz 1998; in prosieguo: il «StVergG»).
7 L’art. 115, n. 1, del StVergG dispone quanto segue:
«In caso di violazione colpevole della presente legge o dei regolamenti per la sua applicazione, perpetrata da organi del soggetto preposto alla procedura di affidamento, il candidato od offerente pretermesso ha, nei confronti dell’amministrazione appaltante cui è imputabile il comportamento di tali organi, un diritto al risarcimento delle spese connesse the presentation of the offer and those resulting from participation in the procurement procedure. The claims, including those relating to the possible loss of income, must be brought an action before the ordinary courts. "
Article 8. 1298 of the Austrian Civil Code (Allgemeines Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch 'the ABGB) provides:
"He who claims to have found no fault, unable to settle the obligation imposed on him by a contract or by law, is required to provide supporting evidence. If he, by virtue of a contractual agreement, is only liable in case of serious misconduct must also demonstrate the absence of that condition. "
Article 9. ABGB 1299 provides:
"He who exercises a public office, an art, a profession or trade, or who voluntarily and without the need is in charge of managing a business whose realization requires specific knowledge or uncommon diligence, he shows that they felt in the possession of the necessary diligence and uncommon knowledge required, so it's bound to answer any lack thereof. However, if his lack of experience was known to the person who entrusted him the job or he could have become acquainted with ordinary care, it also incurs a fault that may be charged. "
The facts of the case and the questions
10 In 1998 the City of Graz has issued a call for tender by open procedure at EU level for the production and supply of hot mix asphalt in accordance with the provisions of StVergG. The notice, published in the Official Journal of the European Communities and the Grazer Zeitung, noted as the place of performance "Graz, Austria 'and provides, in a column titled" Brief description (type of contract, general characteristics, purpose of the work or construction), supply of hot mix asphalt during the year 1999. The notice also stated under the heading "Terms of the implementation of the performance ', the following dates:" Start: 1 March 1999 end: December 20, 1999. "
11 fourteen bids were filed. The best was the one presented by the construction Held & Franck Bau GmbH (hereinafter "HFB"). According to the information contained in the application reference, if that company had been excluded, should have been granted the joint supply companies Strabag and Others
12 The HFB had attached to its offer in a letter which informed, "integrative way," that its new facility for the asphalt mix, which was to be constructed in the following weeks in the Municipality of Großwilfersdorf , would become operational from May 17, 1999. The companies Strabag and Others unaware of the existence of this letter.
13 On May 5, 1999 the company Strabag and Others brought before the Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark (Commission di controllo sugli appalti pubblici del Land Stiria) un ricorso nel quale hanno fatto valere che la HFB non disponeva, nel Land Stiria, di impianti per la fabbricazione di conglomerato bituminoso a caldo, ciò che metteva l’impresa suddetta nell’impossibilità tecnica di eseguire l’appalto in questione. Pertanto, a loro avviso, l’offerta di tale impresa doveva essere esclusa.
14 Le società Strabag e a. hanno parallelamente proposto una domanda di provvedimenti provvisori, la quale è stata accolta dal Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark con ordinanza 10 maggio 1999, che ha vietato alla Stadt Graz di procedere all’aggiudicazione dell’appalto in attesa della decisione the merits.
15 By decision of 10 June 1999, the Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark has fully rejected the appeal of the companies Strabag and Others and, in particular, questions designed to obtain the opening of a procedure for review of the HFB and exclusion from the race. It held that the company had a permit holder carrying on asphalt and that the claim that the mixing plant hot mix should already be in existence at the time of opening of tenders would be disproportionate and contrary to the object of the current uses of the trade.
16 Il 14 giugno 1999 la Stadt Graz ha aggiudicato l’appalto alla HFB.
17 Con decisione in data 9 ottobre 2002 il Verwaltungsgerichtshof, a seguito di un ricorso proposto dalle società Strabag e a., ha annullato la decisione del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark a motivo della difformità dell’offerta della HFB rispetto al bando di gara, in quanto, sebbene il periodo fissato per la fornitura della prestazione si estendesse dal 1° marzo al 20 dicembre 1999, l’impresa suddetta aveva potuto disporre del suo nuovo impianto di miscelazione dell’asfalto soltanto a partire dal 17 maggio 1999.
18 L’Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat für die Steiermark (Consiglio amministrativo indipendente per il Land Stiria), il quale nel 2002 è subentrato nelle competenze prima esercitate dal Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, ha statuito, con decisione in data 23 aprile 2003, che, a causa di una violazione del StVergG, l’appalto non era stato legittimamente attribuito dalla Stadt Graz.
19 Le società Strabag e a. hanno proposto dinanzi ai giudici ordinari un’azione diretta ad ottenere la condanna della Stadt Graz al pagamento a loro favore della somma di EUR 300 000 a titolo di risarcimento danni. A sostegno della loro azione, esse hanno fatto valere che l’offerta della HFB avrebbe dovuto essere esclusa a motivo di un vizio insanabile e che di conseguenza avrebbe dovuto essere accolta la loro offerta. La Stadt Graz avrebbe agito colpevolmente astenendosi dal constatare l’incompatibilità dell’offerta della HFB con le clausole del bando di gara. La decisione del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark non sarebbe idonea ad esonerare da responsabilità la Stadt Graz, la quale avrebbe agito a proprio rischio.
20 La Stadt Graz ha fatto valere, per parte sua, che essa era vincolata dalla decisione del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark e che l’eventuale illegittimità di tale decisione era imputabile al Land Steiermark, cui andava ricondotto l’operato del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark. By contrast, the bodies of the municipality that would not have committed any culpable action.
21 The court of first instance, with a preliminary decision, said the claim for damages based company Strabag and Others, believing that the City of Graz had acted criminally by failing to check the bids and awarding the contract the HFB, despite the obvious defect vitiating its tender, during the period allowed for appeal against the decision of Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark.
22 That decision was upheld on appeal. The court of appeal, however, said their sentenza era impugnabile mediante ricorso per cassazione [«Revision»] ordinario, tenuto conto della mancanza di giurisprudenza dell’Oberster Gerichtshof in merito alla responsabilità dell’amministrazione aggiudicatrice per una condotta colpevole in una situazione caratterizzata, come nel caso di specie, dall’esistenza, alla data dell’aggiudicazione dell’appalto al miglior offerente, di una decisione del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark di convalida del comportamento tenuto dall’amministrazione stessa.
23 Il giudice d’appello ha ritenuto che, sebbene i giudici ordinari fossero vincolati dalla constatazione di illegittimità contenuta nella decisione April 23, 2003 Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat für die Steiermark and had been satisfied that there is a causal link between the unlawful conduct of Stadt Graz and the damage suffered by the companies Strabag and Others, however, it was necessary to examine the question of the existence of a culpability on the part of the Stadt Graz, resulting from its decision to award the contract to the HFB early as June 14, 1999, regardless of the fact, not considered in the decision of 10 June 1999 Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, that the letter accompanying the offer of this company indicated that it was unable to meet the deadlines for the performance of concerned.
24 The City of Graz was brought before Oberster, an appeal against the ruling on appeal.
25 First, the national court has doubts as to whether art. 115, No 1 of StVergG Directive 89/665. Referring to the judgments of 14 October 2004 in Case C-275/03 Commission v Portugal, and 10 January 2008 in Case C-70/06 Commission v Portugal (ECR. I-1), it is uncertain whether it should be considered contrasting any national legislation with the directive that in one way or another bidder makes the right to compensation the existence of guilt on the part of the contracting authority, or whether the conflict exists only in the case of national legislation on the tenderer that the burden of proof of that guilt.
26 The national court points out in this regard, that Article. ABGB 1298 by reversal of the burden of proof, under which the responsibility of the contracting authority for the operation of its organs is assumed. In addition, the administration can not raise the lack of their individual abilities, given that his responsibilities would correspond to that of a subject esperto, ai sensi dell’art. 1299 dell’ABGB. Tuttavia, la Stadt Graz potrebbe validamente assolvere l’onere della prova che le incombe qualora essa fosse stata vincolata, in modo effettivo e pieno, all’osservanza della decisione formalmente definitiva emessa dal Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark.
27 In secondo luogo, supponendo che la direttiva 89/665 non osti ad una normativa nazionale quale quella in questione nella causa principale, il giudice del rinvio – che, al pari del Verwaltungsgerichtshof e del giudice d’appello intervenuti nella presente controversia, nega che l’amministrazione aggiudicatrice sia vincolata da una decisione quale quella emessa il 10 giugno 1999 by Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark - wonders if the argument that the administration was not bound by that decision and could have or even had to award the contract to another tenderer is not a conflict with the objective proclaimed art. 2, No 7 of that directive, the effective implementation of decisions taken by bodies responsible for appeal procedures.
28 Thirdly, assuming that the second question should be answered in the affirmative, the national court finds that companies Strabag and Others and the appeal court censor the City of Graz as this would have awarded the contract the HFB regardless of the fact - not considered by the Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark in its decision of 10 June 1999 - that the company was unable, according to its own guidelines, to perform the contract in question within the prescribed period the tender notice. In those circumstances the national court asks, in the light of Article. 2, No 7 of Directive 89/665, if the contracting authority, even if it were bound by the decision taken by a body such as the Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, or even could, however, have examined the accuracy of that decision and / or exhaustive nature of the assessment on which this was based.
29 In those circumstances, the Oberster Gerichtshof decided to stay proceedings and refer the following questions:
"1) Are Articles. 1 No 1 and 2, No 1 bed. c) of Directive 89/665 (...) (...), or other provisions of this Directive preclude national rules under which the right to damages for breaches of EU public procurement contracts The contracting entity is dependent on the existence of wrongful conduct, even if that rule is applied in the sense that there was in principle, a presumption of guilt of the contracting for the actions of their bodies and to exclude the possibility of such entity to rely on the absence of their individual skills and thus a lack of subjective culpability.
2) If the answer to the first question, whether Article. 2, No 7 of Directive 89/665 (...) (...) should be interpreted as meaning that, under the obligation imposed by that provision to ensure the effective implementation of decisions taken in the procedures for review, the decision to supervisory authority on public procurement should be recognized binding to all the participants in the proceeding and, therefore, also the purchasing entity.
3) If the answer to the second question, whether, pursuant to art. 2, No 7 of Directive 89/665 (...) (...), the contracting authority has the power, or even the obligation, to disregard a final decision of a supervisory authority on public procurement and, if so, what are the assumptions underlying them. "
The questions
The first question
30 By its first question, the national court is essentially asking whether Directive 89/665 must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, which makes the right to compensation as a result of a breach of the rules on public procurement by a 'character to the contracting authority guilty of such violation, if the application of the legislation in question is centered on a presumption of guilt on the part of this administration, and the impossibility for it to rely on the absence of their individual capabilities and Thus, a lack of subjective culpability of the alleged violation.
31 In this regard, it should first be noted that Article. 1 No 1 of Directive 89/665 requires Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure the existence of effective procedures and, in particular, as rapidly as possible against the decisions of contracting authorities have "violated" the right of ' EU public procurement or national rules transposing it. The third
' recital' of the directive points out, for its part, the requirement that remedies must be effective and rapid in the case of 'breach' of the law or standards.
32 As regards, in particular, mode of action seeking damages, Article. 2, No 1 bed. c) of Directive 89/665 provides that Member States shall ensure that the measures taken concerning the review of Article. 1 of the directive provides for the powers to grant such compensation to persons harmed by an infringement.
33 However, Directive 89/665 provides only the minimum requirements that the review procedures established in national legal systems must meet in order to ensure compliance with the requirements of EU law on public procurement ( see, inter alia, 27 febbraio 2003, causa C-327/00, Santex, Racc. pag. I-1877, punto 47, e 19 giugno 2003, causa C-315/01, GAT, Racc. pag. I-6351, punto 45). In mancanza di una disposizione specifica in merito, spetta quindi all’ordinamento giuridico interno di ogni Stato membro determinare le misure necessarie per garantire che le procedure di ricorso consentano effettivamente di accordare un risarcimento ai soggetti lesi da una violazione della normativa sugli appalti pubblici (v., per analogia, sentenza GAT, cit., punto 46).
34 Pertanto, se indubbiamente l’attuazione dell’art. 2, n. 1, lett. c), della direttiva 89/665 rientra, in linea di principio, nell’autonomia procedurale Member States, which is bounded by the principles of equivalence and effectiveness, it must nonetheless determine whether that rule, interpreted in the light of the context in which the general objective and is part of the means of application seeking approval of a compensation, which precludes a national provision such as that at issue in this case makes the conditions set out in paragraph 30 above, the granting of such compensation to the character guilty of violation of the law on public procurement contract by the contracting authority.
35 In this regard, it is important to note, first, that the wording of Articles. 1 No 1 and 2 nn. 1, 5 and 6 and the sixth 'recital' of Directive 89/665 does not in any way indicate that the violation of procurement rules to give rise to a claim for damages in favor of the injured party must have special features, such as that to be related to a fault, alleged or proven, the contracting authority, or that it does not fall under any cause of exemption from liability.
36 This analysis is supported by the context and objective means of general application seeking approval of compensation provided for in Directive 89/665.
37 It is settled giurisprudenza, gli Stati membri, pur essendo tenuti a prevedere mezzi di ricorso che consentano di ottenere l’annullamento di una decisione dell’amministrazione aggiudicatrice contraria alla normativa sugli appalti pubblici, sono legittimati, in vista dell’obiettivo di celerità perseguito dalla direttiva 89/665, a prevedere per questo tipo di ricorsi termini ragionevoli da osservarsi a pena di decadenza, e ciò per evitare che i candidati e gli offerenti possano in qualsiasi momento allegare violazioni della normativa suddetta, obbligando così l’amministrazione aggiudicatrice a riprendere l’intera procedura al fine di rimediare a tali violazioni [v. in tal senso, in particolare, sentenze 12 dicembre 2002, causa C-470/99, Universale-Bau and Others, ECR. I-11617, paragraphs 74-78; Santex, cit., Paragraphs 51 and 52, October 11, 2007, Case C-241/06, Lämmerzahl ECR. I-8415, paragraphs 50 and 51, and January 28, 2010, Case C-406/08, Uniplex (UK), not yet reported, paragraph 38].
38 Furthermore, Article. 2, No 6, second paragraph, of Directive 89/665 gives the Member States to provide that, after the conclusion of the contract following its award, the powers of the body responsible for appeal procedures are limited to an award of .
39 In this context, the remedy provided for by compensation. 2, No 1 bed. c) of Directive 89/665 may, where appropriate, an alternative procedural compatible with the principle of effectiveness, the underlying objective of effectiveness of the actions pursued by the Directive [see to that effect, inter alia, Uniplex (UK), cit., paragraph 40], only if the possibility of recognizing compensation for breach of public procurement rules are not subject - just as there are other remedies provided for by Article. 2, No 1 - the finding of wrongful conduct required by the contracting authority.
40 As noted by the European Commission, it matters little in this regard that, unlike the national legislation considered in the judgment October 14, 2004, Commission v Portugal, the legislation at issue in this case do not impose the burden on the victim of proving the existence of a fault of the contracting authority, but requires it to overcome the presumption of guilt imposed on it by limiting the reasons given for this purpose.
41 The latter legislation also creates the risk that the agency affected by an unlawful decision of a contracting aggiudicatrice venga comunque privato del diritto di ottenere un risarcimento per il danno causato da tale decisione, nel caso in cui l’amministrazione suddetta riesca a vincere la presunzione di colpevolezza su di essa gravante. Orbene, secondo quanto risulta dalla presente domanda di pronuncia pregiudiziale, e così come confermato dalle discussioni svoltesi all’udienza, una simile eventualità non risulta esclusa nel caso di specie, tenuto conto della possibilità per la Stadt Graz di invocare il carattere scusabile dell’errore di diritto da essa asseritamente commesso, a motivo dell’intervento della decisione 10 giugno 1999 del Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, che ha rigettato il ricorso delle società Strabag e a.
42 At the very least, the agency that runs the risk, by virtue of such legislation, to obtain compensation only belatedly, given the length of time as may be necessary for the investigation of a civil nature intended guilty of the alleged violation.
43 However, in either case, the situation would be contrary to Directive 89/665, as set out in Article. 1 No 1, and the third 'whereas' the latter, which is to ensure the existence of effective remedies and as rapidly as possible against decisions taken by the authorities in breach of procurement rules.
44 should also be noted that, even assuming that, in this case, the City of Graz might have held, in June 1999 to be required, noting the inherent efficiency of any proceedings for the award of public to give immediate effect to the decision of 10 June 1999 Vergabekontrollsenat des Landes Steiermark, without awaiting the expiry of the deadline for appeal of that decision, the fact remains that, as stated by the Commission at the hearing, the determination of the merits a claim for compensation proposta dall’offerente pretermesso a seguito dell’annullamento di tale decisione da parte di un giudice amministrativo non può, per parte sua, essere subordinato – in contrasto con il tenore, l’economia sistematica e la finalità delle disposizioni della direttiva 89/665 contemplanti il diritto ad ottenere tale risarcimento – ad una valutazione del carattere colpevole del comportamento dell’amministrazione aggiudicatrice chiamata in causa.
45 Tenuto conto delle considerazioni che precedono, occorre risolvere la prima questione dichiarando che la direttiva 89/665 deve essere interpretata nel senso che essa osta ad una normativa nazionale, la quale subordini il diritto ad ottenere compensation by reason of a breach of the rules on public procurement by the contracting authority in character guilty of such violation, even if the application of the legislation in question is centered on a presumption of guilt on the part of the administration above, and the impossibility for it to rely on the absence of their individual capabilities and, therefore, a lack of subjective culpability of the alleged violation.
The second and third questions
46 Given the answer to the first question, it is necessary to answer the other two questions.
Costs
47 in respect of the main parties, these proceedings are pending before the national court, which is responsible for the decision on costs. The costs incurred by other parties to submit comments to the Court are not recoverable.
For these reasons, the Court (Third Chamber) hereby:
The Council Directive of 21 December 1989, 89/665/EEC on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of procedures concerning the award degli appalti pubblici di forniture e di lavori, come modificata dalla direttiva del Consiglio 18 giugno 1992, 92/50/CEE, deve essere interpretata nel senso che essa osta ad una normativa nazionale, la quale subordini il diritto ad ottenere un risarcimento a motivo di una violazione della disciplina sugli appalti pubblici da parte di un’amministrazione
aggiudicatrice al carattere colpevole di tale violazione, anche nel caso in cui l’applicazione della normativa in questione sia incentrata su una presunzione di colpevolezza in capo all’amministrazione suddetta, nonché sull’impossibilità per quest’ultima di far valere la mancanza di proprie capacità individuali e, dunque, un difetto subjective culpability of the alleged violation.
Chianti In Bottle Wrapped In Raffia
Constitutional Court, October 8, 2010, No 293
JUDGEMENT NO 293
YEAR 2010
ITALIAN REPUBLIC
IN THE NAME OF THE ITALIAN PEOPLE
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
composed of: Chairman: Francesco AMIRANTE ; Judges: Ugo De Siervo, Paolo MADDALENA, Alfio Finocchiaro, Alfonso Quaranta, Franco GALLO, Luigi Mazzella, Gaetano SILVESTRI, Sabino Cassese, Maria Rita Saulle, Giuseppe Tesauro, Paolo Maria NAPOLITANO, Joseph fridge, Alessandro Criscuolo, Paul Grossi,
gives the following
JUDGEMENT
in reviews of the constitutionality of Article 43 of Decree of President of the Republic June 8, 2001, No 327 (Consolidated text of the laws and regulations relating to eminent domain), promoted by the Campania Regional Administrative Court by two orders of October 28 and with an order of November 18, 2008, registered as Nos. respectively. 114, 115 and 116 of the Register of Orders 2009 and published in the Official Gazette No 17, first special series 2009.
In view of appearance of ND and others, and other MRP and the City of Casapesenna and others as well as acts of intervention by the President of the Council of Ministers;
heard the public hearing of July 7, 2010 Judge Rapporteur Giuseppe Tesauro,
heard lawyers Guerriero Francesco and Antonio Sasso for ND and others, Antonio Sasso for MRP and others, for the City of Victoria Fabrizio Casapesenna lawyer Maurizio Borgo State for Prime Ministers.
The facts
1. - The Administrative Court the Campania region, with three sets of identical content, given in many reviews, the first two of 28 October 2008 (order No. 114 and No. 115 of 2009) and the third of November 18, 2008 (order No. 116 of 2009), raised , in reference to Articles 3, 24, 42, 76, 97, 113 and 117, first paragraph of the Constitution, the question of the constitutionality of Article 43 of Decree of President of the Republic June 8, 2001, No 327 (Consolidated text of the laws and regulations relating to expropriation for public use).
1.1 .- The first two orders (order No. 114 and No. 115 of 2009) concerning the same case, claim that the applicants are all owners of a fund in Casapesenna, the subject of proceedings scalers, in the same order as the TAR, with no judgments respectively 73, No 74, 2008, had annulled the contested acts and condemned the City of Casapesenna to return the land, after restoration of the rule of the place. The actors, with separate applications, then reunited by the TAR, appealed for the execution of res judicata, demanding the return of the fund, and have appealed against the decision of the City Council with which the city has ordered, pursuant to Art. 43, paragraph 2, of the said Presidential Decree, the acquisition unavailable to the heritage of these areas, pay a sum by way of damages.
1.2 .- The referring courts still preliminary matter, in fact, that the story was the subject of an initial decision of that Court (January 23, 2003, n. 387) with which the work of the administration had been criticized because of lack of accomplishment ' procedure provided for the formation of urban variant, and for breach of opinions with stakeholders. In proceedings under the Ordinance ron 114 of 2009, with subsequent judgments were later overturned a note of the town of refusing to return the occupied land and willing to return the same to restore the condition of the premises (Case 5 June 2003, No. 7290 ), and was still allowed the application to run on the judged with the appointment of a Commissioner ad acta. Subsequently, the Council of State, ruling May 3, 2005, No 2095, declared that the administration weighed the obligation to return the occupied area.
Then, with the above mentioned judgments of the same TAR (No 73 and No 74 of 2008), had been canceled for lack of the documents relating to proceedings under art. 43 of DPR 327 of 2001, with the common condemnation of the return of the land after restoration of the rule of the place. Finally, the measure of acquisition had occurred within the meaning of healing art. 43.
1.3 .- The third order (order No. 116 of 2009) sets out, in fact, that the applicant, owner of land in the town of St. Joseph Vesuvius (Naples), he had been told by common employment, without any expropriation proceedings.
After ups and downs in point of jurisdiction, the Court of Nola, considering its jurisdiction, rooting for the pirated nature of employment, had finally denied the purchase of property in the hands of the government.
Later, he was adopted by the charge of the Public Works and Urban Development Office and expropriation of the City of San Giuseppe Vesuviano, Decree No prot. 2006 0020376, contested in the main proceedings, by which veniva disposta l’acquisizione coattiva al patrimonio indisponibile comunale dell’area, prevedendo, altresì in favore del proprietario «oltre l’indennizzo, il risarcimento del danno nonchè il computo degli interessi moratori a decorrere dal giorno in cui il terreno sia stato occupato senza titolo».
In particolare, il ricorrente deduceva la violazione degli artt. 43 e 57, comma l, del d.P.R. n. 327 del 2001, lamentando l’inapplicabilità al caso di specie del procedimento ex art. 43 ed invocando l’applicazione del regime transitorio ex art. 57, comma 1, con obbligo di restituzione dell’immobile e risarcimento del danno ex art. 2043 del codice civile per l’illegittima, further employment.
1.4 .- That said, the courts in the main proceedings point out that, in case of cancellation of judicial review with the process of eminent domain, the owner may seek - through the trial of compliance - the return of the asset rather than damages for monetary equivalent, although the area has been irreversibly changed as a result of a public execution. Moreover, the only remedy to prevent the return of the enactment of a measure would capture the so-called "healing" art. 43 of DPR 327 of 2001, in the absence of which the administration can not rely on the realization of the public intervened as a cause of objective impossibility and therefore an impediment to the return.
1.5. - The TAR Campania, after mentioning the case on the legality of so-called occupation "appropriate", it assumes that those findings are inconsistent with the legislative framework introduced by presidential decree No. 327 of 2001 and entered into force June 30, 2003, as available today censored dependent on the adoption of a special discretionary measure the transfer of ownership of immovable property used for public interest purposes, following transformation, developing in the absence of valid and effective expropriation or declaring the public utility. Furthermore, it might be concluded that Article. 43 available only for the future, as it is available, having the nature of the case referring to all cases of occupation sine titulo, also already subsisting on the date of entry into force of the single text (a consolation, recalls: Cons. State, IV, May 21 2007, No. 2582, AP, April 29, 2005, 2; TAR. Emilia-Romagna, Bologna, I, October 27, 2003, n. 2160).
1.6 .- The court, as to jurisdiction, consider themselves bound to abide to the consolidated jurisprudence that, in relation to procedures for expropriation per pubblica utilità, sono devolute alla giurisdizione esclusiva del giudice amministrativo le controversie nelle quali si faccia questione, anche a fini risarcitori, di attività di occupazione e trasformazione di un bene conseguenti ad una dichiarazione di pubblica utilità e con essa congruenti, anche in presenza di atti poi dichiarati illegittimi.
1.7.– Ciò posto, con riferimento alla delibera di acquisizione delle aree, il Tribunale richiama la giurisprudenza secondo cui tale atto persegue una finalità di sanatoria di situazioni prive di procedure legittime di esproprio, senza che rilevi la causa della illegittimità del comportamento: sia essa conseguente all’assenza di una dichiarazione di public utility or cancel it, or determined by other causes, resulting in significant about the mere fact that the public interest could not be satisfied except by maintaining the status ablation.
In point of noting the referring courts assume that, by adhering to this view, in this case in accordance with the application should be declined jurisdiction, pursuant to the formal acquisition of healing, while the action against the Board resolution should be rejected, because the decision under appeal must be considered in accordance with the abstract model referred to in art. 43.
1.8 .- The Administrative Court Campania doubts, however, the constitutionality of that provision for violation of Articles. 3, 24, 42, 76, 97, 113 and 117 of the Constitution.
In particular, as Articles. 3, 24, 42, 97 and 113 of the Constitution, the Court points out that the exercise of authoritative power of the acquisition, through the adoption of an administrative act, which prevents the return of the past and heal the illegality, would take the kind of instrument "ordinary" through which "legalizes the illegal", removing the tort tort by the act of acquisition. This makes it overturned the constitutional guarantee the right to property under art. 42 of the Constitution, to the extent that the rule "allows the government, even intentionally, [...] to circumvent the procedural requirements of the opposing parties of the three phases of design and verification of standards compliance planning," however, tax rules not only by the city, but also from those responsible for the protection of more and different constraints.
abuse of this instrument would require, however, a strict reading of the provision, since in practice it would be hardly possible to imagine circumstances in which the administration can not justify its function, with the need to pursue a public purpose.
On the other hand, in the opinion of the court, could not be apart from the constitutional principles and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, ratified and implemented by the law of 4 August 1955, No 848 (Ratification and implementation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and the Additional Protocol to the Convention signed in Paris on 20 March 1952) (infra: even the ECHR or Convention European Union), under which property rights could be bought by only through the issuing of a formal administrative decision.
addition, it is stated, the question of constitutionality is raised precisely, noting that, in fact, the ruling which declared the illegality of the procedure itself as "a sort of note that the assumption of the procedure is concluded by the act of acquisition, "resulting in" serious injury to the general principle of the inviolability of the administrative court [...] essentially 'offset by an administrative act of acquisition for use without a good for public interest purposes. " Moreover, it should be also considered that the acquisition sanante ben potrebbe essere «reiterata all’infinito», divenendo non più uno strumento straordinario, ma ordinario, con conseguente «vanificazione dei principi di certezza giuridica e di tutela delle posizioni giuridiche».
In questo contesto, il Tribunale specifica di aver esperito inutilmente ogni tentativo di interpretazione adeguatrice, al fine attribuire alla norma un significato costituzionalmente corretto.
1.9.– Con riferimento, poi, all’art. 117, primo comma, Cost., il Tribunale, dopo aver richiamato la sentenza di questa Corte n. 349 del 2007, con riguardo al rapporto fra norma statale ed obblighi derivanti dalla CEDU, assume che la norma complained of is not consistent with the principles of the European Convention and Art. 6 (F) of the Treaty of Maastricht (as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam), under which the Union shall respect fundamental rights as guaranteed by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, [.. .] as general principles of Community law. " In this sense would suggest the law of the European Court of Human Rights (April 20, 2006, November 15, 2005, May 17, 2005), which have repeatedly held non-compliance with Art. 1, prot. 1 of the Convention on the practice known as "expropriation" that the administration would become owner of the property in the absence of an act scalers. 1.10 .- Finally, the referring courts to censor art. With reference to Article 43. 76 of the Constitution, since Article. 7, paragraph 2, letter d) of the proxy-law March 8, 1999, No 50 (deregulation and codify rules concerning administrative procedures - Simplification Act of 1998) the Government has delegated the mere "formal coordination of the text of the existing provisions, adding, to the extent of such coordination, the changes necessary to ensure logical consistency and systematic standards are also applied in order to adapt and simplify the regulatory language. " Under this law, however, would not 'Reference or the principles and guidelines on pre-existing rules, "not being able to argue that the acquisition was a healing necessary changes to ensure consistency and systematic logic of the legislation.
2 .- In proceedings before the Court, the applicants have made major reviews (ND and others, as the Ordinance of 2009 and 114 ron MRP and others, as the order ron 115, 2009), acts identical in law, asking that the matter be accepted.
2.1 .- The defense of private parties, after having outlined the reasoning behind the order of referral, assume, first, that the act Acquisition provided by the contested provision, it aims to 'remedy' task put in place by the government are unlawfully, causing loss of property, violates Articles. 3, 24, 42, 97 and 117 of the Constitution, leading to "legalize" the illegal, allowing the tort tort.
The applicants, however, bringing large pieces of Court of Cassation on the phenomenon of employment acquisitive, believe the art censored. 43 would run outside of the "canons of constitutional legitimacy," since it gives the government the power to order the acquisition of the property, even where there has been no prior declaration of public utility, or the same has been annulled or made invalid ex tunc.
Ultimately, the contested provision would result in an unbalanced advantage to the public sector, undermining the certainty of legal relations and the expectations of those sacrificing the ability to argue their case on the basis of regulatory conditions "into operating in a certain historical period. "
2.2 .- With regard to the breach of Article. 117, first paragraph of the Constitution, the parties accept that the rule would be in conflict "with the principles underlying the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which have direct relevance in national law, and Article 6 of the Maastricht Treaty, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam. "
This contrast is obvious, given the constant guidance of the European Court of Human Rights in respect of expropriation so-called "indirect."
In particular, we recall some of the decisions of the Court in which it was alleged that the expropriation tends to stabilize a factual situation arising from unlawful acts committed by the administration and that, 'and by virtue of a legal principle or a bill like the art. 43 of the Consolidated Law, the expropriation should not be an alternative means to 'expropriation made in proper form. "
The applicants also point out, as "the Italian anomaly 'has also been the subject of an interim resolution, dated February 14, 2007, by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, where national authorities have been "encouraged" ... to continue their efforts and take all additional measures necessary to remedy permanently to the practice of "indirect expropriation". "
In this European context, then, the Italian government authorities have admitted, be inferred that the rule contained in Article. 43 you on eminent domain if the former is not consistent with the principles of the Convention, so much so that it is suggested an application and interpretation of 'correct'.
2.3 .- Finally, private parties, citing case law of this Court adhere to the complaint in respect of Article. 76 of the Constitution, as the hypothesis of the acquisition, introduced by Art. 43 DPR 327 of 2001, would be "no addentellati with existing legislation," while in the legislature Officer was not authorized to supplement or correct the current weather, but simply to reorder, through an intervention of mere coordination.
3 .- In the opinion on ordinances and No. 114 ron 115 of 2009, is the City of Casapesenna, criticizing the arguments underlying the action of the court. First, the Court of Campania, saying that the establishment in question "the intentions of the legislature was to preserve an exceptional nature," meanwhile was' assumed the nature of ordinary means, "confuses the hypothetical application of" improper "in the standard question, with its unconstitutionality. Inoltre, non sarebbe neppure corretto affermare che l’art. 43 consentirebbe l’illecito aquiliano, in quanto, al contrario, la norma in questione avrebbe proprio escluso in radice che l’eventuale illecito aquiliano possa in sé determinare, come accadeva in passato, l’acquisto della proprietà da parte della pubblica amministrazione.
Il giudice a quo non coglierebbe nel segno neppure con riguardo alla pretesa elusione degli obblighi procedimentali, in quanto il provvedimento di acquisizione deve dare conto specificamente degli interessi in conflitto, compiendo un’esaustiva comparazione dei medesimi, attraverso una congrua motivazione della «sussistenza attuale di un interesse pubblico specific and concrete. " In this sense, therefore, the stringent requirement of justification can, just to the administrative judge, to assess the "logic and reason."
3.1 .- How, then, in contrast to the Strasbourg jurisprudence, the City of Casapesenna believes that, unlike opined the court, the arrests of the ECHR did not object to the application of Article. 43 of DPR 327 of 2001, but the practice dell'accessione reversed, whose own art. 43 would be the legislative solution.
3.2 .- would also be unfounded the allegation of violation of the administrative courts, as the provision in question would not be able to challenge or annulment of the expropriation proceedings preordained, nor the right to compensation for private unlawfully dispossessed, rather than merely to enable the government to opt for monetary compensation, rather than to specific performance. Indeed, Article. 43, rather than undermine the already held, would ensure a fuller implementation, being confined to individual cases and the occurrence of specific conditions that the power of government to opt for monetary compensation, rather than specific performance.
3.3 .- Finally, with regard to the breach art. 76 of the Constitution, it is noted that the expropriation on you, as it seeks to regulatory reform and simplification of procedural rules and organizational innovation in the nature and not merely a compilation, they can make, in the coordination of existing provisions, "the necessary changes to ensure consistency and systematic logic of the legislation. "
4 .- In all proceedings instituted spoke the President of the Council of Ministers, represented and defended by the state, which, in separate acts, which is substantively identical, asked that the question be declared inadmissible and unfounded.
4.1 .- The defense of the state contends, first, the inadmissibility of the question for lack of relevance, noting that this Court in No. 191, 2006, has explicitly ruled that the contested provision of procedural rule has value, so that the referring courts should ask whether it was applicable to the specific case. The issue of the applicability of Article. 43 of you in matters of expropriation occupations sine titulo, effected up before the entry into force of the presidential decree No. 327 of 2001, would, in fact, one of the most debated topics both in doctrine and in jurisprudence. For orientation called the order of referral, In fact, it would be seen as, in the opposite direction, first to the Supreme Court that the judgments September 22, 2008, No 23 943 and 19 December 2007, n. 26732, has ruled out the applicability in view of the fact that Article. 57 of DPR 327 of 2001 governing the applicability of the new rules (and not just the substantive rules) introduced a test based solely on the temporal element of the first act of expropriation proceedings, regardless of subsequent events and further measures that the expropriating could adopt.
addition, the same government with the ruling Sept. 26, 2008 No 4660, avrebbe negato l’applicazione del citato art. 43 ad una fattispecie perfezionatasi, come quella in esame oggi, anteriormente all’entrata in vigore del t.u.
4.2.– La questione sarebbe, ancora, inammissibile perché i rimettenti non avrebbero sperimentato un’interpretazione costituzionale della norme censurata. Ciò in quanto il Tribunale muoverebbe da un’applicazione della disposizione da parte delle amministrazioni e da parte del diritto vivente, che a suo giudizio avrebbe condotto a risultati abnormi, quali quello relativo all’operatività dell’art. 43 in sede di ottemperanza, suscettibile di caducare l’accertamento del diritto alla restituzione del fondo e di travolgere the force of res judicata.
Advocacy According to the State, however, nothing would have prevented the referring courts to evaluate the same way as an interpretation of the constitutionally unlawful acquisitive during the review of compliance, for the same reasons that have been raised in support of the issue of constitutionality.
4.3. - On the merits, the defense of the rule specifies, first, that the instrument of so-called healing acquisition, far from being an ordinary instrument, but is embodied as a "legal way out" by the situation of lawlessness that occurred over the years.
How, then, the relationship with the judge concerning the restitution fund, stressing that the provision in question is not, in itself, a tool to circumvent the final, but would rather not use the standard functional by the administration, which could lead to that consequence. It would, therefore, the duty of the administrative courts rigorously verify the comparison of interest underlying the measure, according to the criteria of reasonableness and proportionality.
The President of the Council of Ministers shows, then, as in this case the court might well declare, pursuant to art. F 21 of the Law of 7 August 1990 241 (New rules of administrative procedure and right of access to administrative documents), the nullity of the order of acquisition adopted by the City for violation of res judicata.
4.4 .- With regard to the issue of breach of Article. 117, first paragraph of the Constitution, for violation of the ECHR, the State Attorney, despite the doubts of the constitutionality feared by some decisions of the Supreme Court (Case No. 26732 of 2007, cit.), First, that the question of Article compatibility. 43 has never been addressed by the Court in Strasbourg. This site, the referring court could, however, interpreted in conformity with the practice "royalties ECHR ', before raising the issue of constitutionality. Moreover, the Administrative Court would have several times expressed in the way of full compatibility of. 43 with the provisions of the ECHR, as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights.
4.5 .- Finally, with regard to the alleged defect of excessive delegation, the President of the Council of Ministers recalls, again, the jurisprudence of the administrative courts that would have denied the existence of such defect.
4.6 .- Finally, the Attorney State points out that any "futility" of the contested provision would inevitably result in the "revival" of the institutions of employment creation pretoria "acquisitive" and "pirated," which would expose the state to more numerous and condemnation by the Strasbourg Court.
legal considerations
1 .- The issues raised by the Campania Regional Administrative Court, with three distinct orders of content which coincides (order No. 114, No. 115 and No. 116 of 2009), relate to Article 43 of Decree of President of the Republic June 8, 2001, No 327 (Consolidated laws and regulations relating to eminent domain), which is governed by the 'Use without a good for public interest purposes. "
1.1 .- reviews are subject to the same standard, censored based on the same parameters under the same profiles and much of the same arguments, asking, therefore, an identical question, and decided to go together with one pronunciation.
2 .- The contested provision was intended to regulate the use without a good for public interest purposes and shall provide that it has used for such purposes immovable property in the absence of a valid and effective measure of expropriation or of declaring the public interest, to dispose of his property unavailable to the acquisition, with the obligation to pay damages to the owner. The disposal rule, also, time and content of the acquisition, the appeal of that, the ability of government to ask the administrative judge "has an order to pay damages, excluding the return of an unlimited time ", setting the criteria for the quantification of damages.
According to the referring court, in point of importance, the application of discipline referred to in art. 43 would lead to the admissibility of complaints in compliance, in consideration of the formal acquisition of healing, at the same time, appeals against the decision to purchase should be discarded, because the decision under appeal should be considered to conform to the model designed by abstract ' entire provision, although in this case, had already given a ruling to return (especially in the judgments entered in the washer 114 and No. 115 of 2009, following the cancellation of the acts relating to the procedure under Article 43)..
The first rule would be contrary to Articles 3, 24, 42, 97 and 113 of the Constitution, as it would, according to the interpretation adopted as living law, the amnesty of illegal expropriations, due to the lack of declaration of public interest, the annulment of the acts or any other cause. In this way, it foreshadowed the exercise of authoritative power of acquisition of the area that would prevent the return of the object, removing the tort tort even in spite of an administrative court, allowing "the government, even deliberately, to avoid ... procedural obligations of the opposing parties of the three phases of design and verification of standards compliance urban design ' with 'serious injury to the general principle of the inviolability of the administrative court, "substantially" offset by an administrative act of acquisition for use without a good for public interest purposes. "
3 .- According to the TAR, the contested provision would, moreover, contrary to art. 117, first paragraph of the Constitution, because it is inconsistent with the principles of the European Convention on Human Rights, as interpreted by the Strasbourg Court, which found contrary to art. 1, prot. 1, the practice of so-called 'indirect expropriation' violation, however, also art. 6 (F) of the Treaty of Maastricht (As amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam), under which the Union shall respect fundamental rights as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, [...] as general principles of law Community. "
4 .- The court, finally, consider that Article. Contested Article 43 would cause vulnus. 76 of the Constitution, because it was issued in violation of the criteria of proxy-law March 8, 1999, No 50 (deregulation and codify rules concerning administrative procedures - Simplification Act of 1998).
5 .- The State Attorney has argued the inadmissibility of the issues, for lack of relevance in the trial court, as this Court, the Court of Cassation and the Council of State would exclude the applicability of Article. Appropriative 43 occupations that occurred before June 30, 2003, date of entry into force of the presidential decree No. 327 of 2001.
5.1 .- The objection is unfounded. The question of the provision in question has not been resolved unambiguously by case law. The Supreme Court rule, in fact, the admissibility of the adoption of a measure to capture the healing art. 43 with respect to occupations that occurred before the appropriative into force of the presidential decree No. 327 of 2001 (judgments of 22 September 2008, No. 23943, July 28, 2008 No 20543, December 19, 2007, No. 26732). Otherwise, the case law of the State Council has become the prevailing principle that 'the acquisition procedure of amnesty in an area occupied sine titulo, described by the said Article 43, is a general application with respect to occupations implemented before the into force of the law '(cons. State, Sec. IV, 26 March 2010, No. 1762, Sec. IV, June 8, 2009, No. 3509, also: Ad. Plen. April 29, 2005, No. 2, Sec. IV, November 16, 2007, No. 5830, considered unqualified jurisdiction by Cass., SS.UU., April 16, 2009, n. 9001).
In presence of this contrast, referral orders were motivated not so implausible as to the applicability of the rule, referring to the case law is overwhelmingly and the 'living law' of the State Council.
6 .- On the merits, should be considered at the outset of the complaints related art. 76 of the Constitution. It is for this Court "to evaluate the complex issues of exceptions and the constituents thema decidendum donated for its consideration" and "establish, even for economy of the proceedings, the order to address them in the absorbed state sentence and the other" ( most recently, Case No. 181 of 2010 e n. 262 del 2009), quando si è in presenza di «questioni tra loro autonome per l’insussistenza di un nesso di pregiudizialità» (sentenza n. 262 del 2009).
Nella specie, è palese la pregiudizialità logico-giuridica delle censure riferite all’art. 76 Cost., giacchè esse investono il corretto esercizio della funzione legislativa e, quindi, la loro eventuale fondatezza eliderebbe in radice ogni questione in ordine al contenuto precettivo della norma in esame.
6.1.– I rimettenti denunciano la violazione dell’art. 76 Cost., deducendo che l’art. 43 non troverebbe «riferimento o principi e criteri direttivi in norme preesistenti», because the proxy-law No. 50 of 1999 provided for the mere coordination of the formal text of the provisions in force, and allowed, within the limits of such coordination, the only changes necessary to ensure consistent and systematic logic of the legislation, in order to adapt and simplify the language.
7 .- The question is based.
8 .- The contested provision provides for the establishment of the so-called "acquired healing." In particular, it has, inter alia, in paragraph 1 that, "assessed the conflicting interests, the authority uses property for public interest purposes, as amended in the absence of valid and effective provvedimento di esproprio o dichiarativo della pubblica utilità, può disporre che esso vada acquisito al suo patrimonio indisponibile e che al proprietario vadano risarciti i danni». Viene, poi, precisato, al comma 2, che l’atto di acquisizione «...a) può essere emanato anche quando sia stato annullato l’atto da cui sia sorto il vincolo preordinato all’esproprio, l’atto che abbia dichiarato la pubblica utilità di un’opera o il decreto di esproprio;».
Si tratta, dunque, della possibilità di acquisire alla mano pubblica un bene privato, in precedenza occupato e modificato per la realizzazione di un’opera di interesse pubblico, anche nel caso in where the effectiveness of the declaration of public utility has failed, with retroactive effect, as a result of its cancellation or for other cause, or even in the absence of such an absolute statement ("the absence of valid and effective measure of expropriation or of declaring the public utility ').
8.1 .- The contested provision is contained in the text only, with regard to expropriation, prepared in accordance with Law No 50 of 1999, which is connected to the Law No 15 March 1997 59 (Delegation to the Government for the allocation of functions and tasks to regions and local authorities, the public administration reform and administrative simplification), which had provided a general strumento permanente di semplificazione e di delegificazione.
In particolare, la delega riguardava il «riordino» delle norme elencate nell’allegato I alla legge n. 59 del 1997 (nel testo risultante a seguito dell’art. 1, legge 24 novembre 2000, n. 340 – Disposizioni per la delegificazione di norme e per la semplificazione di procedimenti amministrativi – Legge di semplificazione 1999), che contemplava, quale oggetto, il «procedimento di espropriazione per causa di pubblica utilità e altre procedure connesse: legge 25 giugno 1865, n. 2359; legge 22 ottobre 1971, n. 865».
8.2.– Il chiaro tenore delle norme richiamate rende palese che the delegation concerned explicitly covered by the same legal framework laid down by the laws of the fabric No And No. 2359 of 1865 865 of 1971.
The expropriation in the public interest resulting from such legislation was structured, in summary, in a case which involved the decision of declaring the public utility work and the setting of deadlines, with the related discipline cases indifferibilità and urgency. Later, the Law 865 of 1971 had provided the concentration of one-step procedure, by attaching the declaration of public utility, together with the declaration of emergency indifferibilità and Public Works, for approval works projects by the competent bodies.
Subsequently, and in the presence of a large number of diseases of the administrative procedures for expropriation, consistent sine titulo in investigating employment by the government, the legitimacy of case law had developed institutions of employment 'appropriate' and "pirated."
In summary, the first was characterized by an abnormality of the expropriation proceedings, because of its failure to conclude a formal act ablative, while the second was related to the transformation of the fund of private property without declaration utilities. In the first case (the leading case is found in the decision of the United Sections 26 February 1983, n. 1464), the acquisition of a reversal of this case followed that the accession of civil Articles. 935 ff. cod. Civ. in view of the irreversible transformation of the fund. According to this reconstruction, the destination of irreversible illegally occupied private land involved in the purchase original title, by the public, land ownership and the simultaneous extinction of the right of private property. The subsequent decision of the United Sections June 10, 1988, No 3940, states the figure of the "occupation acquisitive ' limiting it to cases where there is a valid declaration of public utility which was used to give precedence to the public interest over private interest.
The 'employment pirated, however, not accompanied by a declaration of public utility, ab initio or effect of intervening to cancel the relevant act or expiry of the relevant terms, as such, therefore, did not determine the effect acquisitive in favor of the government.
8.3 .- E 'this, in essence, the regulatory environment in which you have inserted the aforementioned art. 43, also comprising the mentioned institutes judicial origin, who have in time governed the matter.
in the text only the legislator was bound by the following principles and criteria contained in Art. 7, paragraph 2 of law No. 50: The precise identification of the existing text of the rules (b art. 7 cit.) Indications of the regulations repealed, even by implication by subsequent provisions (c) the coordination of "formal" of the text of the existing provisions , by providing, within the limits of such coordination, the necessary changes to ensure consistency and systematic logic of the legislation, in order to adapt and simplify the regulatory language (d).
The proxy-law norm, then, reference to the provisions, not included in the consolidated text, which remains in force (e) and the explicit repeal of all remaining provisions, do not call back, which regulated the subject matter of deregulation, with express indication of such in an annex to the text only (f).
8.4 .- It should be examined, therefore, whether the legislator has observed the above principles and criteria.
According to the established jurisprudence of this Court, the constitutionality review of the legislative delegation is carried out through a comparison of the results of two trials hermeneutical parallel. The first concerns the rules that determine the object, the principles and criteria set out by the delegation, taking into account the overall context of rules in which they are located and identify the reasons and purposes underlying the law of the delegation. The second concerns the rules imposed by the legislator, to be interpreted as meaning consistent with the principles and criteria governing the delegation (ex plurimis, Case No. 230 of 2010, No. 98 of 2008, No. 54 of 2007, No. 280 2004, No. 199 of 2003).
Therefore, on the one hand, reference must be made to the scheme of delegation, on the other, should be taken into account the possibility, inherent in the instrument of delegation, to introduce standards that are coherent development of the principles laid down by the legislator, the other yet, although within the discretion of the legislator to enact rules represent a coherent development and, where appropriate, a completion of the choices made by the legislature (Case No. 199 of 2003, Ordinance No. 213 of 2005) but it is necessary that this discretion is exercised within the limits established by the principles and criteria.
Furthermore, it is settled jurisprudence of this Court, where the delegation involves, as in this case, the review, reorganization and rehabilitation of existing rules, these objectives warrant An adjustment to the new regulatory framework governing the overall achievements of the overlap in time, in view of provisions issued to different situations and structures. The introduction of fundamentally new solutions to the system existing legislation, however, is permissible only if they are established principles and criteria appropriate to circumscribe the discretion of the legislator (Case No. 170 of 2007 and No. 239 of 2003) .
8.5 .- In light of these principles, it is clear the merits of the complaints made by the referring courts.
The proxy-law had given on this point, the legislature delegated the power to provide only a coordination of "formal" provisions relating to "force". The institute provided for and regulated by the contested provision, by contrast, is characterized by several aspects of novelty, compared to both the governing expropriation to which the provisions expressly covered by the proxy-law, both judicial institutions mainly matrix.
First, There does not appear in the laws specified in that Annex, the Law 59 of 1997, any rule that would justify action by the government, by way of rectification, the procedures laid down scaler.
addition, neither may be related to the context jurisprudence of the guidelines mentioned above, several aspects of what is known as "acquired healing", as governed by the contested provision, quite clearly go beyond the institutions of employment and occupation appropriative, as appropriate, as spelled out by those guidelines.
The aforementioned art. 43, in fact, has absorbed the first two figures, introducing the possibility for the administration and for those who use the good to ask the administrative judge, in any event and without time limit, the order to pay in lieu of a refund. Moreover, it also extends this framework to the easement, with which the Court had ruled l’applicabilità della cosiddetta occupazione appropriativa, trattandosi di fattispecie non applicabile all’acquisto di un diritto reale in re aliena, in quanto difetta la non emendabile trasformazione del suolo in una componente essenziale dell’opera pubblica.
Infine, la norma censurata differisce il prodursi dell’effetto traslativo al momento dell’atto di acquisizione.
Si tratta di elementi di sicuro rilievo e qualificanti, i quali dimostrano che la norma in esame non solo è marcatamente innovativa rispetto al contesto normativo positivo di cui era consentito un mero riordino, ma neppure è coerente con quegli orientamenti di giurisprudenza che, in via interpretation, they had managed to put a remedy to some serious diseases that emerged during the expropriation proceedings. Such character of the contested provision is confirmed by the fact that significant, as the Court's legitimacy, in employment of urgency, the occurrence of an administrative act could not have retroactive effective healing, due to discretionary choices by the public body or his authoritative powers. In the scheme resulting from the contested provision, however, it is expected a general power to rectify the situation, attributed to the same administration that has committed the offense, despite a ruling ordering the rest in a specific form of property rights violated.
The legislator, ultimately, could not innovate at all and outside of each bond at its discretion expressly identified by law-delegation. This court has said about it, in fact, that, as size can recognize the power of filling the legislator, 'free appreciation "of that" can never rise to a principle or a guiding principle, as the polar opposite of legislation bonds, that is, by definition, the delegated legislation "(Case No 340 of 2007 and No 68 of 1991).
In contrast, it should not be inferred, as the Avvocatura State that the legislator intended to take account of objections raised by the Strasbourg jurisprudence to the practice of expropriation "indirect".
is Independently of any consideration relating to the fact that this was not covered in the principles and criteria laid down in Article cited several times. 7 of Law No 50 of 1999, both legitimate doubt as to the suitability of the choice made by the rule to ensure compliance with the principles of the ECHR, which here can not be solved, that is foreshadowed only one of many possible solutions. The legislature could have achieved that target and regulate the matter in different ways, and even expunge the tutto la possibilità di acquisto connesso esclusivamente a fatti occupatori, garantendo la restituzione del bene al privato, in analogia con altri ordinamenti europei. E neppure è mancato qualche rilievo in questo senso della Corte di Strasburgo, la quale, infatti, sia pure incidentalmente, ha precisato che l’espropriazione indiretta si pone in violazione del principio di legalità, perché non è in grado di assicurare un sufficiente grado di certezza e permette all’amministrazione di utilizzare a proprio vantaggio una situazione di fatto derivante da «azioni illegali», e ciò sia allorchè essa costituisca conseguenza di un’interpretazione giurisprudenziale, sia allorchè derivi da una legge – con espresso riferimento all’articolo 43 del t.u. qui censurato –, in quanto tale forma di espropriazione non può comunque costituire un’alternativa ad un’espropriazione adottata secondo «buona e debita forma» (Causa Sciarrotta ed altri c. Italia – Terza Sezione – sentenza 12 gennaio 2006 – ricorso n. 14793/02).
Anche considerando la giurisprudenza di Strasburgo, pertanto, non è affatto sicuro che la mera trasposizione in legge di un istituto, in astratto suscettibile di perpetuare le stesse negative conseguenze dell’espropriazione indiretta, sia sufficiente di per sé a risolvere il grave vulnus al principio di legalità.
Like the remarks made, must be declared as unconstitutional the entire art. 43 of DPR 327 of 2001, as the discipline inherent in the acquisition of the right of easement, referred to in paragraph 6 a, is closely and inseparably connected with other clauses, either by express reference to the rules made the subject of censorship, either because presupposes the application and further development of application framework (see Judgement No. 18 of 2009).
9 .- The ruling of unconstitutionality in respect of Article. 76 of the Constitution, determines the absorption of the questions with reference to Arts. 3, 24, 42, 97, 113 e 117, primo comma, Cost.
per questi motivi
LA CORTE COSTITUZIONALE
dichiara l’illegittimità costituzionale dell’articolo 43 del decreto del Presidente della Repubblica 8 giugno 2001, n. 327 (Testo unico delle disposizioni legislative e regolamentari in materia di espropriazione per pubblica utilità).
Così deciso in Roma, nella sede della Corte costituzionale, Palazzo della Consulta, il 4 ottobre 2010.
F.to:
Francesco AMIRANTE, Presidente
Giuseppe TESAURO, Redattore
Giuseppe DI PAOLA, Cancelliere
Depositata in Cancelleria l'8 ottobre 2010.
Il Direttore della Cancelleria
F.to: DI PAOLA
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)