No usucaption on building facades, no billboards

The case submitted to the Tribunal of Palermo (judgment 2797 of 24 June 2025) once again demonstrates the marked peculiarity of condominium law and the many facets with which it manifests itself. The case is that of a condominium that sued an individual condominium owner in order to ascertain the unlawful installation of someadvertising billboards on the facades of the building and to obtain from the court an order to have them removed. The defendant appeared before the court and objected to the usucaption of the right in rem to use those facades (occupied by its four advertising hoardings, two on one side of the building and two on the other).

The Court of First Instance, prompted by the defendant's objection, addressed this preliminary issue, stating, as a general rule, that, in a condominium, the usucapión of a common property is possible, but that certain specific conditions must nevertheless be met, consisting in long-term possession of the property, the evidence of such possession to all the other owners and, finally, the simultaneous impediment to the latter's use of the same property.

Therefore, whereas, as a rule, for usucaption (of any immovable property) to occur, it is sufficient for conduct in the light of daylight, even in bad faith, such as to highlight the exercise of a power attributed by law only to the owner and not to others, in the case of the usucaption of aparty of condominiums, the interested party must instead demonstrate that the other co-owners are unable to have any concrete relationship with the property in dispute.

In the present case, the defendant, on the one hand, claimed to have exercised the right of use over a portion of the condominium façade for a period exceeding the prescribed twenty years for the purposes of usucaption, and, on the other hand, asserted that this minimal occupation did not prevent the other owners from using the remaining common part. The consequence is that, since the requirement of the total exclusion of the other owners from the use of the particular common property has not been fulfilled, the alleged acquisition by usucapione of the right of exclusive use of the portion of the condominium façade cannot be established.

In conclusion, therefore, not only is there no 'purchase' of the property in exclusive ownership, but the installed artefacts must also beremoved. In addition to this, the Sicilian Court also makes reference to the well known ruling of the Unified Sections (Court of Cassation, Unified Sections, 17 December 2020, no. 28972) according to which the so-called "real right of exclusive use" over a condominium "part" (indeed, provided for in many notarial deeds) is not recognised by the legal system as it conflicts with the principle of the closed number of real rights and their typicality (by virtue of which the establishment of new types is precluded).