When is architectural decoration damaged?

What is architectural decoration, who establishes it and which works are considered contrary to the aesthetics of the condominium building.

The architectural decoration of a condominium building is a recurring theme in the legal field: we find it expressed in various provisions of the civil code. But what exactly does this concept include and which interventions can be considered contrary to it?

The jurisprudence (and most recently the Supreme Court, with sentence no. 16518/2023) have provided important clarifications on when the architectural decoration is damaged, establishing specific criteria to evaluate the impact of aesthetic changes on buildings. We’ll talk more about it below.

What does architectural decoration include?

Architectural decoration is nothing other than thegeneral aesthetic appearance of a building. The latter is, in turn, composed of symmetryfrom theaesthetics and fromgeneral architecture of the palace. The damage to just one of these elements is enough to constitute a violation of decorum. In fact, they give the building a harmonious and distinctive image.

Therefore decoration is not reserved only for buildings of artistic value, but concerns every construction, endowed with its own aesthetic dignity.

Any violation of architectural decorum must be assessed taking into account not only the lines originally defined by the builder, but also the modifications and variations made to the building by further interventions (carried out by individual condominiums or by the condominium in general). For example, where all condominium owners have installed antennas and air conditioners on the external facade of the building, it will not be the awning erected by another that detracts from its aesthetic appearance.

Therefore, architectural decoration is not an absolute value: on the contrary, it must be measured in relation to the specific characteristics of the individual building at a given moment (it can therefore change over time).

What is architectural decoration?

We have understood that architectural decoration is an abstract asset, however susceptible to impacting the commercial value of individual real estate properties. Therefore it is also a common good (like the stairs, the entrance hall, the courtyard, etc.), i.e. all the condominiums. Each of these, in fact, as we will see shortly, can act individually in his defense.

What rules provide for the protection of architectural decoration?

The concept of architectural decoration in condominium buildings is found in various provisions of the Civil Code.

L’art. 1120 Civil Code. prohibits innovations that compromise the stability and safety of the building or alter the architectural decoration or make common parts of the building unusable for use or enjoyment.

The art. 1127 Civil Code

., dictated regarding the raising of the top floor, provides that condominium owners can oppose the raising of new factories in the event that the new work compromises the architectural appearance of the building or significantly reduces ventilation or lighting on the floors below.

L’art. 1122 Civil Code. prescribes that the condominium owner cannot carry out works that cause damage to the common areas or cause damage to the stability, safety or architectural decoration of the building.

The art. 1122-bis Civil Code., finally, reiterates how the installation of non-centralized systems for radio and television reception and for access to any other type of information flow (including by satellite or cable) must in any case preserve the architectural decoration of the building.

In which cases does the alteration of the decoration occur?

The alteration of the decoration occurs when an intervention significantly modifies one or more of the elements constituting the aesthetics of the building, compromising its visual harmony.

The works do not need to be visible from the outside to consider them harmful; what matters is the impact of the intervention on the lines and original style of the building. So, for example, in a condominium with an internal courtyard, construction built on a balcony that does not overlook the public road is also detrimental to decorum.

What are the consequences of unauthorized alterations?

Modifications that alter the architectural decor without the consent of the condominium may be subject to a demolition order by the civil judge. Such alterations, in fact, not only compromise the aesthetics of the building but can also negatively affect its economic value.

The following can submit an appeal to the Court:

• the condominium, in the person ofadministrator (which, for this purpose, does not require the prior consent of the assembly);
• Everything is fine single condominium which can intervene for the protection of common goods.

Is it possible to intervene on a building that has already been modified?

A building already aesthetically altered

does not justify further degradation. However, according to the Court of Cassation, a modification cannot be considered prejudicial if it has been carried out on a building whose aesthetics were impaired as a result of previous works. Let’s try to explain ourselves better.

The building may have been affected, over the course of decades, by interventions carried out by individual condominium owners, who have disharmonized the aesthetic unit by breaking the original conformation. Therefore, in the event that the condominium has been remodeled several times, the subsequent work may no longer be considered contrary to architectural decorum.

The decoration must be considered in relation to the current condition of the building, taking into account the specific use that has been made of it by the condominiums and the previous interventions that have adapted the building to a use different from the original one. The severity in evaluating modifications and innovations varies depending on the characteristics of the building: for example, a modern building with simple and geometric lines will be subject to a less rigorous evaluation than a historic building with important architectural details and decorated balconies, where the evaluation will have to be much more stringent.

The works that may have already compromised the decoration can be:

• external units of air conditioners of various sizes;
• fixtures of different materials;
• closed balconies with different structures;
• railings with various designs;
• shutters of different colors;
• awnings with various patterns and colors.

To establish whether a modification – recently carried out and contested – has actually produced an aesthetic alteration, the actual previous conditions in which the building was located must be taken into account.

Any work that involves a modification of the original architectural appearance of the building cannot be considered prohibited a priori since the aesthetic criterion should not be understood in an absolute sense, but in a relative sense, i.e. in relation to any compromise that the building may have suffered over time.

For example, a veranda will not alter the architectural decoration if, in the condominium complex, there are already other verandas, gazebos, canopies, shelters, large retractable pergolas, removable windows, etc. (Cass., sentence 10 December 2014, n. 26055). It is clear that the creation of the hypothesized veranda compartment will not damage the architectural decoration, since it has been degraded by the pre-existing modification interventions (Cass., sentence 26 February 2009 n. 4679 and sentence 27 October 2003, n. 16098). Violation of architectural decorum must be excluded if the property has been defaced by other pre-existing and never contested artefacts.