Light pollution, building owners to be compensated if company headlights point into the house
As with sound, lights must also be assessed as exceeding normal tolerability
Key points
On the subject of immissions, the list in Article 844 of the Civil Code (smoke, heat, exhalations, noises, shaking) is to be considered merely illustrative. It is therefore considered that all immissions that penetrate into another person's property can be included in the definition. The Court of Naples, civil section VI, in its ordinance no. 6502 of 31 December 2025, considers, for example, luminous immissions.
The affair
The pronouncement was originated by the owners of a flat in Casoria (in the province of Naples) located near a bus depot. The lighting of the latter was directed inappropriately towards their home, causing them enormous harm due to a powerful and insistent beam of light operating during the night hours.
The situation had already been brought to the company's attention several times, but the invitations to correctly position the lights had not been heeded, so much so that the condominium owners turned to the Court of Naples, which appointed a technical consultant to ascertain the inconvenience.
The commissioned engineer confirmed a phenomenon of intense disturbing and debilitating glare at night, pointing out that 'by varying the angle of the light beam, it is possible to considerably reduce the glare found in the flat'. The owners, therefore, demanded reorientation of the lights and compensation for the damage suffered, with a penalty for the delay in the intervention.
Tolerability to be assessed
First of all, it is specified in the judgment that light disturbance is fully within the scope of Article 844 of the Civil Code, being equated with noise disturbance, with a note of specificity given by the circumstance that light pollution from fixed installations often has a character of continuity, whereas noise is not necessarily continuous.
