News Supreme Court Judgments April 2021

Thermal coat: all condominiums pay for it.

Expenses incurred to carry out thermal insulation of a condominium building must be borne by all condominium owners in proportion to the value of their ownership share, as they do not constitute burdensome or wanton innovations, with respect to which Article 1121 of the Civil Code admits the possibility for condominium owners not interested in benefiting from the said works to be exempted from contributing to the expense for them.
This was made clear in the very recent Ordinance no. 10371/2021 of the Supreme Court of Cassation, in which the Court clarified that expenses incurred for insulation work constitute an intervention to improve energy efficiency for the benefit of the entire condominium: therefore, all condominiums, including owners of basement rooms, are required to share in the expenses for the construction of thermal insulation.

Divorce allowance and nullity of religious marriage: clarification from the United Sections

The United Sections intervened on the subject of divorce in ruling no. 9004/2021, specifying that “the recognition of the effectiveness of the ecclesiastical ruling on the nullity of a religious marriage, which occurred after the pronouncement on the cessation of civil effects has become final – but before the decision on the related economic consequences has become final – does not result in the cessation of the matter in the civil case.”
Indeed, the Court, resolving a jurisprudential conflict that arose within its First Section, clarified that it is to be excluded that the recognition of the effectiveness of the ecclesiastical judgment of nullity of the religious marriage is capable of precluding the continuation of the civil suit having as its object the assessment of the entitlement to and settlement of the divorce allowance.

No interest to heirs before declaration of inheritance

The Supreme Court, in Order no. 9670 of April 13, 2021, denied that the heirs are entitled to interest on the sums belonging to the deceased, holder of the deposit contract, accrued during the period between the death of the decedent and the filing of the declaration of inheritance.
In fact, Art. 48 paragraph 4, of Legislative Decree. October 31, 1990, no. 346, provides that the bank is prohibited from matching securities belonging to the deceased prior to the filing of the probate or supplementary declaration.
This is a hypothesis of legal uncollectability of the claim, which, therefore, until the submission of the declaration of succession (or negative declaration) is, as uncollectible, unproductive of interest, both correspondent and full right.