School in Frosinone ends up at auction, 500 pupils to be evacuated

The Execution Judge of the Court of Frosinone rejected the appeal filed by Mayor Riccardo Mastrangeli and the municipal administration: the 'Pietrobono' music-oriented middle school will have to be sold at auction and, before the sale, the building will have to be vacated by the students: about 500 boys and girls, divided into 21 classes. The magistrate rejected the request to suspend the eviction order and the enforcement procedure, considering that the decree by which the municipality acquired the building to its assets is not opposable to the pending foreclosure procedure. The school building is therefore to all intents and purposes still privately owned. The auction thus remains set for 18 February 2026.

The affair has its roots in the 1970s. The school building was built on land that is still in the name of a private individual, which emerged as part of debt enforcement proceedings. The expropriation procedure initiated at the time was never finalised with the necessary transcription, formally leaving the land at the disposal of the original owner. In order to remedy the situation, the municipality had adopted a measure of 'sanctioning acquisition', provided for by the legislation on expropriations for public utility, arguing that the consolidated public interest made the transfer of the property to the municipal assets legitimate.

The Regional Administrative Court of Lazio had held the act to be administratively legitimate. According to the enforcement judge, however, the question of administrative legitimacy is distinct from the question of the enforceability of the act in the enforcement procedure. The magistrate clarified that the amnesty acquisition produces non-retroactive effects and cannot therefore cancel already registered rights, such as the attachment. Consequently, the property remains subject to forced sale. The Municipality's arguments on the alleged lack of jurisdiction of the ordinary judge and the need to protect educational continuity were also rejected.

The order notes that the institution is occupying the property without an enforceable title to the proceedings and that the situation has been going on for some time without any formalised alternative solutions, such as an occupation indemnity or agreements with the receiver. The judge did, however, leave open the possibility of assessing organisational solutions linked to the end of the school year at the hearing, but ruled out the prerequisites for an urgent stay. Therefore, the order to vacate the building remains valid and the process towards auction sale continues. The next hearing is already scheduled for 18 February.