CONDOMINIUM - obligations to third parties - RESPONSABILITA'-ALLOCATION BETWEEN THE CONDOMINIUMS
Resolving a conflict of law with respect to liability or "pro rata" of condominiums for the obligations contracted by the administrator in the interest of the condominium, the SU considered legitimate taking up the minority view, the principle of parziarietà, namely the division between the condominiums of the obligations assumed in the interests of the condominium in proportion to their shares. In particular, the Court has emphasized that the debt, although common, is divisible by the sums of money, the solidarity in the building is not covered by no rule of law and art. 1123 cc does not distinguish between the external profile of the internal administrator binds the individual to the extent of its powers and the mandate given by reason of the shares.
*
Supreme Court Cassazione - Sezioni Unite Civile
Sentenza n. 9148/2008 - deposito del 08 aprile 2008
Svolgimento del processo
Con decreto 24 marzo 1884, il Presidente del Tribunale di Bologna ingiunse al Condominio di via
… omissis …, Bologna, ed ai condomini Anna, Adriana e Alfredo R. , Ugo C., Giampaolo B.,
Donata M., Adriana T. ed alla società I. s.r.l. di pagare alla E. s.r.l. L. 66.800.276, quale residuo del
corrispettivo per i lavori eseguiti nell'edificio condominiale. Proposero opposizione con distinti atti di
citazione Anna e Adriana R. , le quali dedussero l'inammissibilità della duplice condanna emessa
sia a carico del condominio, sia nei loro confronti in via solidarity, since they had met to share pro
obligations towards society E. , Alfredo R. claimed to have purchased the
only usufruct of a housing unit on June 2, 1993, when the work committed to the company
E. had already been completed, however, since the expenditure on maintenance works
, they were charged to the bare owner.
together the reviews and called into question the Condominium, condominiums Innocent Q., Be Quiet
the company I. Ltd., which demanded the dismissal of the application proposal with the application for an order, ruling with
April 28, 2000, the Court revoked the decree of Bologna, with February 19, 2003 ruling,
the Court of Appeals rejected the appeal brought by the Bologna company E. .
He appealed to the Supreme Court with six reasons the company E. ; Have resisted defense
Anna, Adriana and Alfredo R. . Has not worked as the defensive Condominium notice on ... ...
omission, in the person of the office.
The Second Civil Chamber, by order of February 7, 2007, No 2621, has referred the documents to the Prime
President, having considered the existence of a conflict within the section, assuming that to a first address
(majority) the responsibility of the individual blocks for debts incurred by the condominium to
terzi avrebbe natura solidale, mentre per un secondo orientamento,
decisamente minoritario, avrebbe vigore il principio della parziarietà, ovverosia dalla ripartizione tra
i condomini delle obbligazioni assunte nell'interesse del condominio in proporzione alle rispettive
quote.
Per la risoluzione del contrasto la causa viene alle Sezioni Unite civili.
Motivi della decisione
La società ricorrente lamenta:
1.1 con il primo motivo, violazione e falsa applicazione degli artt. 1115 e 1139 cod. civ., in relazione
all'art. 360 n. 3, cod. proc. civ. La giurisprudenza dominante, anche successivamente all'isolata
sentenza n. 8530 del 1996, che aveva affermato la parziarietà, ha sempre sostenuto e continua a
sostenere la natura solidale delle obbligazioni dei condomini;
1.2 con il secondo motivo, falsa applicazione degli artt. 1004 e 1005 cod. civ., ai senso dell'art. 360
n. 3 cod. proc. civ., posto che la ripartizione delle spese fra nudo proprietario usufruttuario operano
nei rapporti interni e non sono opponibili al terzo creditore;
1.3 con il terzo motivo, violazione dell'art. 112 cod. proc. civ., in relazione all'art. 360 n. 3 cod. proc.
civ., poiché la sentenza di primo grado aveva posto a fondamento della decisione ragioni diverse
da quelle dedotte nell'opposizione al decreto ingiuntivo;
1.4 con il quarto motivo, omessa compensazione delle spese processuali con riferimento ad
Alfredo R. ;
Con il quinto motivo, violazione dell'art. 91 cod. proc. civ., ai sensi degli artt. 360 nn. 3 e 5 cod.
proc. civ., non sussistendo soccombenza nei confronti del Condominio, che era stato chiamato in
giudizio da Alfredo R. ;
Con il sesto motivo, violazione dell'art. 63 disp. att., in relazione all'art. 360 n. 3 cod. proc. civ., non
aveva tenuto conto dell'orientamento della Suprema Corte, secondo cui l'acquirente di una unità
immobiliare doveva essere tenuto alle spese solidalmente al suo dante causa.
2.1 La questione di diritto, che la Suprema Corte deve risolvere per decidere la controversia,
riguarda la natura delle obbligazioni dei condomini.
Secondo l'orientamento majority of case law, the responsibility of individual participants
for debts incurred by the condominium to the third joint in nature, having regard to the general rule of Article
. 1294 cod. Civ. for the case where several persons are subject to the same service
: principle shall not derogate from Article. 1123 cod. Civ. which is to distribute the burden
inside the building (Cass., Sec. II, April 5, 1982, No. 2085, Cass., Sec. II, April 17
1993 No 4558, Cass. , Sec. II, July 30, 2004, No. 14593; Cass., Sec. II, August 31, 2005, No. 17563). To address
definitely a minority, the responsibility of the condominium is governed by the policy by
parziarietà: in proportion to their shares to individual participants allocate bonds
taken in the interest of "condominium" with respect to the costs of conservation and the enjoyment of things
of the building, for the provision of services common interest and decided by a majority
innovations. Therefore, the obligations of the condominiums are governed by
criteria similar to those laid down in Articles. 752 and 1295 cod. Civ. for the debts inherited
that the payment of debts the hereditary heirs contribute in proportion to their shares and
the claim in one of the solid co-debtors is divided among the heirs in proportion to
heritable (Cass., Sec. II, September 27, 1996, n. 8530).
2.2 To determine the legal principles that govern the obligations (contractual)
unit which bind the number of taxpayers - the condos - we need to move from the foundation of
solidarity.
The assumption is that joint and several liability arising out of simultaneous presence of several requirements,
lack of them - and a particular provision of law - the requirement does not apply, not being debt
sufficient commonality between the plurality of debtors and the same because of the obligation;
that no specific provision covering the solidarity between the condominiums, which precludes the parziarietà
intrinseca della prestazione; che la solidarietà non possa ricondursi alla asserita unitarietà del
gruppo, in quanto il condominio non raffigura un "ente di gestione", ma una organizzazione
pluralistica e l'amministratore rappresenta immediatamente i singoli partecipanti, nei limiti del
mandato conferito secondo le quote di ciascuno. La disposizione dell'art. 1292 cod. civ. - è noto - si
limita a descrivere il fenomeno e le sue conseguenze. Invero, sotto la rubrica "nozione della
solidarietà", definisce l'obbligazione in solido quella in cui "più debitori sono obbligati tutti per la
medesima prestazione" e aggiunge che ciascuno può essere costretto all'adempimento per la
all (with release of the others). Article. 1294 cod. Civ. states that "the co-debtors are required in
solid, if not by law or is otherwise entitled." None of the rules, however, states
the ratio of solidarity, ie it clarifies the foundation (which is necessary, as
least, to resolve cases of doubt). According to the construction
most reliable, bonds of solidarity, indivisible is several depict
order responses to the problems arising from the presence of several debtors (or creditors), the uniqueness of the case debt
(eadem because obbligandi) and uniqueness of the service
(eadem res due).
While the plurality of debtors and the uniqueness of the case debt arising
issues in this case are not relevant, category dell'idem debitum
offers considerable technical problems: in particular, the uniqueness of the benefit which, by nature, is capable of division, and the identification of
bond of solidarity with respect to the provision which, in its substrate
fact, is naturalistically parziaria.
simplifying complex and very elaborate categories, indivisibility is how to be
performance: in its objective evidence, especially where the lack of natural
indivisibility is not accompanied by an obligation specifically imposed by law on each debtor to fulfill the entire
. Where the provision is not by nature indivisible solidarity depends
by the rules and principles. Solidarity represents a particular attitude to external relations
parziaria inherently a debt when the law favors the commonality of
performance. Otherwise, the structure has the upper hand and parziaria obligation arises
a plurality of bonds that are connected.
It is true that the solidarity which represents a principle concerning the co-debtors in general.
But the general principle applies where, in practice, all the conditions laid down
by law for the joint implementation of condebito. Of course, when performance
common to each of the debtors, at the same time, indivisible. However, if the obligation is divisible, except that the
law (specifically) is considered supportive of the principle of solidarity (passive) must be balanced against that of divisibility
established art. 1314 cod. Civ., that if more debtors are
and the cause is the same obligation, each debtor is not required to pay the debt
for his part. Because solidarity often happens to be the configuration
ex lege, in external relations, of a bond intrinsically several, in default configuration
obligation as supportive legislation and, simultaneously, in the presence of a common bond
but naturalistically, is not divisible by any of the requirements of solidarity and the structure
parziaria obligation prevails.
Moreover, solidarity is less each time the source of the common
is intimately connected with the ownership of the res. The provisions of Articles. 752, 754 and 1295 cod.
Civ. - Which contain the parziarietà the co-owners of the bonds and the replacement, due to the opening of the succession
, born of a single bond with a plurality of bonds
parziarie - Express the criterion of a general connection between the duties and res.
for the truth, it is immediately connected with the bond allocation of inherited assets: bonds of
traced the ownership of property Tari heirs as they fall within the quota.
Each heir is liable only for its share, as it is entitled to a share of real estate Tari.
More generally, where there is the link between the obligation and the amount and structure
obligation, arising from the same case for a number of obligations, there
the character of the indivisibility of the service, it is reasonable to infer that than Solidarity is not covered
(specifically) are overridden by the structure of the bond parziaria. 2.3 The guidelines set out
hermeneutics apply to bonds belonging to groups
organized, but not personified. As regards the structure of liabilities assumed in the so-called
interest of the "condominium" - in fact, ascribed to individual condominiums - are found
certainly the plurality of debtors (condominiums) and eadem obbligandi case, the uniqueness of
cause: the contract on which the debt originated. It is questionable, however, the uniqueness of the service
(ditto debitum) which certainly is one and indivisible to the lender, which makes
a performance benefit and the benefit of all buildings (the renovation of the facade,
waterproofing of the roof, the supply of heating fuel, etc...)
The obligation of the owners (co-debtors), however, are a sum of money, represents a benefit
common but naturalistically divisible.
However, no rule of law expressly provides that the criterion of solidarity applies to bonds
condominiums. Certainly not the art. 1115 paragraph 1 no. Civ. Under the heading
"bonds of solidarity of the participants," the rule states that each participant can claim that they are extinct
severally liable for the obligations of the thing common and that the sum to extinguish
is derived from the selling price of the same thing. The provision, as it relates to
obligations incurred jointly by the Communists for the common thing of value
merely descriptive, not prescriptive: it states that the bonds must be underwritten in
solid, but regulates the obligations, specifically, are contracted to a solid. Apart
this, the provision does not apply to the condominium buildings and does not apply to the condominium, in what
rule the possibility of sale of the common thing. The provision, contemplates what
Division and not subject to common things, common facilities and services of the building, which are
contrassegnati dalla normale indivisibilità ai sensi dell'art. 1119 cod. civ. e, comunque, dalla
assoluta inespropriabilità.
D'altra parte, nelle obbligazioni dei condomini la parziarietà si riconduce all'art. 1123 cod. civ.,
interpretato valorizzando la relazione tra la titolarità della obbligazione e la quella della cosa. Si
tratta di obbligazioni propter rem, che nascono come conseguenza dell'appartenenza in comune,
in ragione della quota, delle cose, degli impianti e dei servizi e, solo in ragione della quota, a
norma dell'art. 1123 cit., i condomini sono tenuti a contribuire alle spese per le parti comuni. Per la
verità, la mera valenza interna del criterio di ripartizione depicts an elegant device, but without the
reflected in the formal data.
If the argument that the award of costs governed by art. 1123 paragraph 1 no. Civ. merely relates to the internal profile
not persuade, not convince even the claim that paragraph 2 of that Article.
1223 - on the allocation of costs for the use of common areas designed to serve
condos in varying degrees, in proportion to the use that anyone can go hungry - make it impossible to implement
parziaria outside: with the result that to determine the implementation, all expenses covered by Article
. 1223 cit. should be regulated the same way. Both cases have in common
connection with the res. The first paragraph covers the costs for the conservation of
common things, with respect to which the property is inherent to the immediate, the second paragraph concerns
usage fees in connection with which there is still things: the obligation , although
influenced by the quantum measurement of different, does not obviate the co-ownership of common shares
, which is its foundation. Ultimately, taking shape as both bonds
obligationes propter rem, as related to the ownership of the real parts
common law, and since these common bonds naturalistically divisible debitoris ex parte, the
constraint is inapplicable and solidarity prevails the intrinsic structure of parziaria
bonds. On the other hand, for their allocation in practice you can always refer to the thousandth
different tables on the ownership and extent of use. 2.5 Neither
solidarity may be accounted for the alleged unity of the group of apartment buildings.
by law, the building is defined as "management entity", to account for the fact that the legitimacy of
not deprive an individual of their participants
legal standing in court in defense of rights to common shares, of avail themselves of the means of appeal
; to intervene in judicial decisions taken by the administrator, ecc.. Ma la figura dell'ente,
ancorché di mera gestione, suppone che coloro i quali ne hanno la rappresentanza non vengano
surrogati dai partecipanti. D'altra parte, gli enti di gestione in senso tecnico raffigurano una
categoria definita ancorché non unitaria, ai quali dalle leggi sono assegnati compiti e responsabilità
differenti e la disciplina eterogenea si adegua alle disparate finalità perseguite (art. 3 legge 22
dicembre 1956, n. 1589). Gli enti di gestione operano in concreto attraverso le società per azioni di
diritto comune, delle quali detengono le partecipazioni azionarie e che organizzano nei modi più
opportuni: in attuazione delle direttive governative, razionalizzano controlled activities,
coordinate programs and provide financial assistance through funds provided. For the structure,
management entities are marked because of the subjectivity (, public) and assets
autonomy (ownership of shares and the endowment fund).
However, despite the questionable resemblance function - the fact that the administrator and the assembly
manage the common parts on behalf of the owners, who share the common
belong - the remarkable diversity of structure and demonstrate the inconsistency of repeated
uncritical reference of the managing the condominium buildings. The condo, in fact, is not the owner of a heritage
self or of rights and obligations: the ownership of rights over things, the
facilities and services in common use, in fact, is part of the individual condominiums, apartment buildings are the same
things ascribed to bonds, facilities and services and the related liability,
obligations incurred in the interest of the so-called condo do not contract in favor of a
institution, but in the interests of individual participants. According to case law, then,
the administrator of the building represents an office comparable to the private law office with
representation: with the subsequent application, nei rapporti tra l'amministratore e ciascuno dei
condomini, delle disposizioni sul mandato.
Orbene, la rappresentanza, non soltanto processuale, dell'amministratore del condominio è
circoscritta alle attribuzioni - ai compiti ed ai poteri - stabilite dall'art. 1130 cod. civ.. In giudizio
l'amministratore rappresenta i singoli condomini, i quali sono parti in causa nei limiti della loro
quota (art. 1118 e 1123 cod. civ.). L'amministratore agisce in giudizio per la tutela dei diritti di
ciascuno dei condomini, nei limiti della loro quota, e solo in questa misura ognuno dei condomini
rappresentati deve rispondere delle conseguenze negative. Del resto, l'amministratore non ha
certo il potere di engage condominiums beyond the law, that each of them in communion,
under the law, acts of purchase and conventions. In proportion to that right
each participant contributes to the appointment of and in proportion to that law must be considered
to confer the legal representation. Just think, if the administrator
act or is sued for the protection of a right, which is headed to only certain
condominiums, condos only interested participating in the trial and they only answer for the consequences of
lite.
Therefore, the director - since it can not compel the individual blocks except within the limits dei
suoi poteri, che non contemplano la modifica dei criteri di imputazione e di ripartizione delle spese
stabiliti dall'art. 1123 c.c. - non può obbligare i singoli condomini se non nei limiti della rispettiva
quota.
2.5 Riepilogando, ritenuto che la solidarietà passiva, in linea di principio, esige la sussistenza non
soltanto della pluralità dei debitori e della identica causa dell'obbligazione, ma altresì della
indivisibilità della prestazione comune; che in mancanza di quest'ultimo requisito e in difetto di una
espressa disposizione di legge, la intrinseca parziarietà della obbligazione prevale; considerato
che l'obbligazione ascritta a tutti i condomini, ancorché common, it is divisible, being
sum of money, that solidarity in the building is not covered by any provision of law and that Article
. 1123 cit., Interpreted according to the literal meaning and according to the system where you insert
does not distinguish between internal and external profile; note finally, that - in accordance with the lack of
unitary structure of the building, whose organization does not
affect the ownership of individual rights, obligations and its responsibilities - the director
binds the individual to the extent of its powers and the mandate given by reason of the units:
all circumstances, bonds and subsequent responsibility of condominiums are governed by the criterion
parziarietà. The individual is charged, in proportion to their shares, bonds
taken in the "interest of the condominium, in relation to expenditure for the conservation and
for the enjoyment of things of the building, for the provision of services to Common
and innovations approved by the majority. Therefore, the obligations of the owners
are regulated by criteria similar to those laid down in Articles. 752 and 1295 cod. Civ. for bonds
hereditary, that the co-owners contribute to the payment of debts hereditary
in proportion to their shares and debt in a solid of co-debtors is divided among the heirs in proportion to the shares
hereditary.
2.6 The contract, signed by your representative, on behalf of and in the interests of the owners
represented and the extent of the powers conferred upon it, directly affects against
represented. Achieved in the sentencing process administrator, as representative of
condominiums, the creditor may perform individual against individual,
accordance with the share of each. Finally, the solution chosen according to strict principles of law governing
contractual obligations with the common variety of taxpayers, it is appropriate to the needs
of fundamental justice emerging from economic and social reality of
condominium buildings. In truth, solidarity would benefit the creditor who,
contract with the administrator of the building, knows the situation of the party and the debtor can protect
in various ways, but it appears preferable to the criterion of parziarietà, which does not force the debtors to
sometimes anticipate very considerable sums as a result of choice (unexpected)
made unilaterally by the creditor. At the same time, there are no reasons for postponing the opportunity
distribution of debt among the condominiums at the time of revenge, rather than implement
at the time of settlement.
Rejected the main reason, can not be accepted any of the other grounds of appeal. Not
second and sixth. According to the conditions of the building (Article 67 avail. Att., Moreover
in accordance with the provisions for the costs imposed by Articles sull'usufrutto. 1004 and 1005 cod. Civ.)
defray expenses related to the usufructuary
ordinary administration and the simple enjoyment of things and common services, and innovations, reconstruction and maintenance costs
compete with the owner, but the costs are part usufructuary
limited to the time in which he has held the real right thing to others. Rightly so, the Court of Appeals
non ha considerato responsabile Alfredo R. , in quanto l'usufrutto da lui era stato
acquistato in epoca successiva alla data, in cui l'esecuzione dei lavori era stata commissionata ed
eseguita. Non il terzo motivo, posto che il giudice del merito ha preso in esame la questione di
diritto inerente alla la controversia e ritenuta indispensabile per la decisione. Non il quarto ed il
quinto motivo, in quanto la decisione sulle spese processuali è rimessa al giudice del merito, con il
solo limite di non condannare la parte interamente vittoriosa.
Avuto riguardo alla difficoltà della materia ed al contrasto esistente in giurisprudenza, si ravvisano i
giusti motivi per compensare interamente tra le parti le spese processuali. PQM
The Court rejects the appeal and award costs
Comment
Note the decision
Cass. Sec. A. Civil
9148/2008 (obligations of the individual blocks in the common interest).
(Mr. Paul Brocchi)
The sentence in question radically innovate the substantive law condominium. In fact, one of the principles most relevant
cast, until now, the teaching of the Supreme judicial
College, was represented by the so-called unlimited joint and several liability of individual condominiums propter rem
having regard to the obligations incurred in the interest of the community. In fact, so
if the administrator, recalled the provisions of art. 1130, co. 1, nos. 3 and 4, had subscribed to
under negotiation, contract administration of goods and services on behalf of the managing, rather than
contracts, just, in the latter case, the shareholders' resolution ritual, in
hypothesis failure, as the counter-charged the building synallagmatic
(payment of the price), the third creditor would have acted, fitted with a title judicial enforcement
undergoing the property (or rather the local unit) owned by any one
condominiums, named to the entire answer, unless the action di regresso. E'
intuibile che tale principio (praticamente indiscusso) era tale da garantire in modo alquanto
penetrante il diritto di credito del terzo contraente, che entrava in rapporto contrattuale con un
condominio, il quale era, rettamente, considerato non solo tra i debitori più solvibili (qualità che
oggi - comunque - non perde), ma anche tale da consentire una escussione della pretesa creditoria
secondo tempi e modalità estremamente solleciti.
Al contrario, il pronunciamento oggi in commento, di cui alla sentenza Cass. ss. uu. 8.4.2008, n.
9148 interviene ad innovare profondamente non solo il diritto condominiale, ma, più latamente,
anche gli stessi equilibri negoziali were concerned that to date the meter, with significant repercussions
and guessed on the formation of cd synallagma. The decisum is shared, coherent and free from defects
logical. The legal issue addressed by the Supreme Court is clear
and now incontrovertible: the responsibility of the owners must be guided by the criterion of
parziarietà, ie, in proportion to their shares to individual participants
charge the obligations undertaken in the interests of the condominium with respect to the costs for the maintenance and
for the enjoyment of things of the building, for the provision of services in the common interest
and innovations approved by the majority. Pertanto, le obbligazioni dei condomini sono
regolate da criteri consimili, dice ancora il Collegio, a quelli dettati dagli artt. 752 e 1295 c.c., per le
obbligazioni ereditarie, secondo cui al pagamento dei debiti ereditari i coeredi concorrono in
proporzione alle loro quote e l'obbligazione in solido di uno dei condebitori si ripartisce tra gli eredi
in proporzione alle quote ereditarie. La parziarietà dell'obbligazione si riconduce altresì all'art. 1123
c.c., interpretato valorizzando la relazione tra la titolarità della obbligazione e quella della cosa. Si
tratta, proprio, di obbligazioni propter rem, le quali nascono come conseguenza dell'appartenenza in
comune, in ragione della quota, things, plant and services and, simply by virtue of the share
under that Article. 1123 cc, the condominiums are required and are therefore qualified persons
in order to make a contribution for the common parts. Considered, the Board concludes that the
joint and several liability, in principle, requires the existence not only of the plurality of debtors and
identical because of obligation, but also the indivisibility of the service common
that in the absence of this' last requirement, and in the absence of an express provision of law, the inherent obligation of
parziarietà prevails, since the debt attributed to all the condominiums, although
comune, é divisibile, trattandosi di somma di denaro; che la solidarietà nel condominio
non é contemplata da nessuna disposizione di legge e che l'art. 1123 c.c. non distingue il profilo
esterno e quello interno; rilevato, infine, che, in conformità con il difetto di struttura unitaria del
condominio, la cui organizzazione non incide sulla titolarità individuale dei diritti, delle
obbligazioni e della relativa responsabilità, l'amministratore vincola i singoli nei limiti delle sue
attribuzioni e del mandato conferitogli in ragione delle quote; tutto ciò premesso, le obbligazioni e
la susseguente responsabilità dei condomini sono governate dal principio della parziarietà.
Conseguita nel processo la condanna dell'amministratore, quale rappresentante dei condomini, il
creditore può procedere all'esecuzione individualmente nei confronti dei singoli, secondo la quota di
ciascuno.
In effetti é proprio quest'ultima la sintesi più limpida dell'odierno decisum. Ovvero, una pronuncia
che limita la odierna speditezza e agilità avuto riguardo alle esecuzioni poste in essere nei riguardi
del debitore condominio, ma che, innegabilmente, riequilibra in maniera molto significativa la
posizione di coloro che, condomini, per avere già, in precedenza, adempiuto pro-quota alle
obbligazioni assunte dall'ente di gestione nei riguardi del creditore, potevano see themselves exposed
the previous ruling principle of unlimited solidarity initiative promoted by the Executive
creditor equipped title.
The home ownership is now a long-standing right to die case law. The practice
will soon reveal how today's decisum will stand the test of facts, to become the
newspaper reports that engage stakeholders.
0 comments:
Post a Comment