Planning, Court: ‘Builders acted in good faith; case law changed years later’

Planning, Court: ‘Builders acted in good faith; case law changed years later’
Follow us on

Milan, 16 June (LaPresse) – ‘In all cases, the subjective element of the offence is lacking, whether intentional or negligent, given that only in recent years have criminal and administrative case law, and even the most recent rulings of the Constitutional Court, offered different interpretations of the concept of building “renovation”.’ This is stated by the Court of Milan in a note signed by President Fabio Roia, explaining the ruling on the Torre Milano case prior to the filing of the grounds. “The established practice of the Municipality of Milan,” it reads, “permitted the Torre Milano project under the permit actually issued to OPM srl”, namely a SCIA.

Milan, 16 June (LaPresse) – ‘In all cases, the subjective element of the offence is lacking, whether intentional or negligent, given that only in recent years have criminal and administrative case law, and even the most recent rulings of the Constitutional Court, offered different interpretations of the concept of building “renovation”.’ This is stated by the Court of Milan in a note signed by President Fabio Roia, explaining the ruling on the Torre Milano case prior to the filing of the grounds. “The established practice of the Municipality of Milan,” it reads, “permitted the Torre Milano project under the permit actually issued to OPM srl”, namely a SCIA.

© Riproduzione Riservata