Timeshare Directive, link

The Court of Cassation ruled on an appeal brought by "Pozzolana Flegrea srl" against the orders issued in the Tribunal of Napoli, preventive seizure orders Articles 322 bis, 325 and 606 of the criminal procedure code, of a floating seasonal pier in the protected marine reserve area Zone B of the Campi Flegrei Regional Park. The Court quashed the contested order and sent it back to the Court of Naples for further examination.

"Pozzolana Flegrea srl" presented a revocation of the preventive seizure of a floating pontoon of a seasonal nature in a protected marine reserve area, Zone B of the Campi Flegrei Regional Park. The Court of Naples has rejected the precautionary appeal, pursuant to art. 322 bis cod.proc.pen., motivating the decision to reject with the need to obtain the building permit for the construction of a floating pontoon of a seasonal nature. For the cancellation of the order, Pozzolana Flegrea srl ​​filed an appeal. The Court of Cassation stated that, the art. 31 of Legislative Decree, 23 May 2011, n. 79 - and in compliance with Directive 2008/122 / CE, relating to timeshare contracts, contracts relating to long-term holiday products, resale and exchange contracts: "Without prejudice to compliance with the state legislation on protection the environment and cultural heritage and the regulations for the use of protected natural areas, the creation of structures of tourist-recreational interest dedicated to pleasure boating [...] including seasonal floating pontoons, [...] it does not require any additional building permit and state property”.

Does the creation of structures of tourist-recreational interest, including seasonal floating pontoons, require any additional building permits?

The article. 31 of Legislative Decree no. 79 of 2011, modifying the previous discipline, excluded the need of permits for the construction of structures of tourist-recreational interest, including seasonal floating pontoons. In this context, it must be considered that the need for building permits, even after the 2011 changes, is excluded due to the type and characteristics of the complementary services.

Testo integrale: Testo integrale

Nessun risultato disponibile

Nessun risultato disponibile

The Court revokes the contested order and returns to the Court of Naples for further examination.