<p class="western" align="right"></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Massima</b></span></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>La Pubblica Amministrazione è tenuta ad accertare – massime nelle fattispecie di procedimento ad istanza del privato – se l’interesse di quest’ultimo sia o meno compatibile con l’interesse pubblico; ciò non già </i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">sine die</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>, quanto piuttosto secondo una sequenza cronologica prefissata dal legislatore che – tra le altre cose – annovera un termine finale al cui spirare affiora una vera e propria responsabilità dell’Amministrazione medesima; essa si atteggia diversamente a seconda della relativa riconducibilità ad un atto lecito, quantunque dannoso, ovvero ad un vero e proprio illecito: nel primo caso la conseguenza (automatica) è – per talune fattispecie - un indennizzo collegato al mero ritardo procedimentale, mentre nel secondo scatta l’obbligo di risarcire al privato istante il danno che sia conseguenza immediata e diretta di un ritardo procedimentale doloso o quanto meno colposo della PA; fatta salva, in quest’ultima evenienza (come, in qualche modo, anche nella prima), la necessità di verificare la natura aquiliana, ovvero “contrattuale”, della ridetta, pertinente responsabilità pubblica, con quanto ne consegue in tema di onere della prova.</i></span></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Crono-articolo</b></span></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1942</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 16 marzo viene varato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>R.D. n.267</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nuovo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>codice civile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (entrato in vigore il 21 aprile), che qualifica il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>peculiare forma di inadempimento dell’obbligazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, implicante la nascita in capo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>creditore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: ai sensi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’art.1218</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> infatti il debitore che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non esegue esattamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prestazione dovuta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è tenuto al </span><a href="https://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/3912.html"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l'<a href="https://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/4835.html">inadempimento</a> o il <a href="https://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/3515.html">ritardo</a></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>determinato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b><a href="https://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/1569.html">impossibilità</a> della prestazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivante da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>causa <a href="https://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/1569.html">a lui non imputabile</a></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, configurando dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ipotesi qualificata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inesatta esecuzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ratione temporis</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prestazione dovuta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al creditore, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>onere della prova liberatoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (non imputabilità del ritardo) a carico </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>del debitore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Più specificamente poi, ai sensi del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>successivo art.1224</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nelle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>obbligazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che hanno per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>oggetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>somma di danaro</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (c.d. obbligazioni </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pecuniarie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), sono dovuti da debitore – muovendo dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giorno della <a href="https://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/1583.html">mora</a></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, dunque, per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutto il ritardo maturato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scadenza del termine di pagamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - gli </span><a href="https://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/3589.html"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi legali</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anche se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non erano dovuti precedentemente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e anche se il creditore </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di aver sofferto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alcun danno </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(risarcimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>forfetario e predeterminato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prima della mora</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> erano dovuti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi in misura superiore a quella legale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, gli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi moratori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e, dunque, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) sono poi dovuti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nella stessa misura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, mentre al creditore che dimostra di aver </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>subito un danno maggiore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> spetta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l'ulteriore risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che tuttavia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è dovuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se è stata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>convenuta tra le parti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>misura degli interessi moratori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Importante poi anche il successivo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.1457</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla cui stregua se il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b><a href="https://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/1912.html">termine</a> fissato per la prestazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una delle parti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in seno ad un contratto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> deve considerarsi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b><a href="https://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/1805.html">essenziale</a> nell'interesse dell'altra</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, questa, salvo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>patto o uso contrario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, se vuole </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esigerne l'esecuzione nonostante la scadenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del termine (e, dunque, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nonostante il ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), deve </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>darne notizia all'altra parte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> entro </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>3 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il contratto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si intende risoluto di diritto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anche se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è stata espressamente pattuita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risoluzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1948</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 01 gennaio entra in vigore la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Costituzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> repubblicana, che prevede una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riserve di legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>organizzazione dei pubblici uffici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in modo da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assicurare l’imparzialità ed il buon andamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (art.97) della Pubblica Amministrazione, la quale a rigore </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può dunque concludere procedimenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (con connessa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>erogazione </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(o mancata erogazione) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di beni e servizi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai privati istanti) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rispettando i termini</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per taluno e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non rispettandoli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per talaltro. Su un piano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più generale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> importante anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art. 28</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, alla cui stregua </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>i funzionari e i dipendenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dello </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Stato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>enti pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sono </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>direttamente responsabili</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, secondo le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>leggi penali, civili e amministrative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atti compiuti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione di diritti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità civile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, essa (a differenza di quella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>penale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si estende</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> allo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Stato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e agli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>enti pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di appartenenza.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1990</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 7 agosto viene varata la legge 241 in tema di procedimento amministrativo, il cui art.2 prevede che ove il procedimento consegua obbligatoriamente ad una istanza, ovvero debba essere iniziato d'ufficio, la pubblica amministrazione ha il dovere di concluderlo mediante l'adozione di un provvedimento espresso; in particolare, stando al comma 2 le PPAA determinano per ciascun tipo di procedimento, in quanto non sia già direttamente disposto per legge o per regolamento, il termine entro cui esso deve concludersi, termine che decorre dall'inizio di ufficio del procedimento o dal ricevimento della domanda se il procedimento e' ad iniziativa di parte, e che va reso pubblico secondo quanto previsto dall’ordinamento di ciascuna singola PA; qualora peraltro le PPAA non provvedano ai sensi del comma 2, il termine fissato ex lege dal comma 3 è pari a 30 giorni. </span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1997</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 15 marzo esce la legge n.59, recante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>delega al Governo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conferimento di funzioni e compiti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Regioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>enti locali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riforma della Pubblica Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e per la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplificazione amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.17, comma 1, lettera f)</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>delega </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il Governo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a prevedere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>forme di indennizzo automatico e forfettario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per i casi di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato rispetto del termine del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata o ritardata adozione del provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: si tratta di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>forma indennitaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assume a proprio presupposto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero fatto dell’inadempimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>obbligo di provvedere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque in sostanza il “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo”</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA, senza che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>venga conferito alcun peso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di maggiore o minore </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fondatezza della pretesa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> spiccata dal soggetto privato, e dunque di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>minore o maggiore compatibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>relativo interesse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quello pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Una delega che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non verrà attuata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, forse anche per i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dubbi ermeneutici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>medesima impostazione sistematica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che essa solleva: il termine “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>indennizzo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” fa peraltro pensare ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della PA per atto lecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nel quale si compendierebbe appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, circostanza che, nondimeno, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche in dottrina</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non trova tutti d’accordo.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2004</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 6 luglio esce la nota sentenza della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Corte costituzionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> n.</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>204</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che riconosce la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>previsione di giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in capo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> solo al cospetto della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spendita di un potere in capo alla Pubblica Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Si tratta di una pronuncia che innescherà, in una prima fase, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il dubbio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (poi superato) che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivante da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo perpetrato da quest’ultima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, configurandosi essi quali </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meri comportamenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e non già quali atti o provvedimenti), </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non possa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dare la stura a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>controversie appannaggio del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto piuttosto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>del GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2005</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 7 marzo esce l’ordinanza della IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.875 che, nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimettere all’Adunanza Plenaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>importanti questioni interpretative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, elabora una propria </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tripartizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per quanto riguarda </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizio </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(da ritardo appunto), onde si configura un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da tardiva adozione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento legittimo sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato (che dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha atteso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sentirsi legittimamente dire di no</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla PA); in questa ipotesi si parla di “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>danno da mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, in quanto ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>essere leso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse meramente procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato istante, avente ad oggetto la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tempestiva conclusione</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ex </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2 della legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, senza </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in alcun modo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> considerare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’effettiva lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del proprio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse sostanziale al conseguimento del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (che gli è stato del resto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimamente negato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da tardiva adozione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento legittimo favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato (che dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha atteso per sentirsi dire legittimamente di si</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla PA); un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, infine,</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> da mancata adozione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alcun provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> pur </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato, e dunque un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno scaturigine del “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>silenzio</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inerzia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA. Per il Collegio, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> va più in specie ricostruito come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione dell’interesse del privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rispetto dei tempi di definizione della pertinente istanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> siccome </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prescritti dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bacino procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e ciò muovendo dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contrattuale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, da ricondursi ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contatto amministrativo qualificato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’affidamento riposto dal privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>certezza dei tempi dell’azione amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appare – nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>realtà economica contemporanea</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e secondo la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>moderna concezione del c.d. rapporto amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse meritevole di tutela di per sé</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> considerato, non apparendo al Collegio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sufficiente relegare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> simile tutela alla previsione ed alla concreta azionabilità di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>strumenti processuali di tipo propulsivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, i quali presuppongono la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sola ottica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (in qualche modo “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>reale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”) del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguimento dell’utilità finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">,e che tuttavia si palesano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nel medesimo tempo assai meno appaganti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con riguardo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’interesse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (“</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>obbligatorio</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”) del privato istante a vedere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>definita con cronologica certezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la propria </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>posizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con riguardo alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>specifica istanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di volta in volta spiccata nei confronti della PA e, in caso contrario, a vedersi risarcita la lesione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’interesse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>cronologica certezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sotteso. Il Consiglio di Stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimette tuttavia all’Adunanza Plenaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la questione afferente al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreto atteggiarsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, in specie, alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da mero ritardo della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procrastinato il procedimento oltre</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termini legalmente prescritti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 31 marzo esce la sentenza delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>SSUU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della Cassazione n.6745 alla cui stregua sia le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>controversie</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitorie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> scaturite da c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sia quelle conseguenti ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, devono assumersi avere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ad oggetto l’esercizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – o, più precisamente, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato esercizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>poteri autoritativi pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, funzionali al perseguimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’interesse pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, certamente rientranti nell’ambito della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 15 settembre esce la sentenza dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Adunanza Plenaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del Consiglio di Stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>n.7</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, alla cui stregua deve assumersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Per il Collegio il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo è risarcibile solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> allorché affiori la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spettanza in capo al privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>connesso bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che vi è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sotteso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, mentre all’opposto laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il provvedimento “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ritardato</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sfavorevole</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si configura </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nessun diritto autonomo al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e ciò atteso come il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sistema di tutela degli interessi pretensivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – nelle ipotesi in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si fa affidamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>statuizioni del giudice</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la relativa realizzazione – consenta il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>passaggio a riparazioni per equivalente solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quando </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’interesse pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> considerato, incapace di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trovare realizzazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’atto (favorevole)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>congiunzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’interesse pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, assuma a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprio oggetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela di interessi sostanziali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, perciò, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata adozione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo nella adozione di un provvedimento vantaggioso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’interessato (suscettibile di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>appagare un c.d. bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’interessato medesimo). Per il Collegio, più in specie, va </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>escluso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> stesso della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sequenza procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autonomamente considerato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, possa essere assunto quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita tutelabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in via </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>leso dal ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e ciò perché – con riguardo a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ciascun procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – affiora </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un solo bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che si identifica in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quello di cui all’istanza del privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rimasta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inevasa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ovvero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>evasa con ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla competente Amministrazione, sicché si ha </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se si accerta la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spettanza del ridetto (unico) bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ottenibile giusta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento vantaggioso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> adottato dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>PA procedente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Sotto il profilo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>processuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la Plenaria </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conferma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quanto già affermato in marzo dalle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>SSUU della Cassazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde sia le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>controversie</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitorie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> scaturite da c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sia quelle conseguenti ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, devono assumersi avere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ad oggetto l’esercizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – o, più precisamente, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato esercizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>poteri autoritativi pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, funzionali al perseguimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’interesse pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, certamente rientranti nell’ambito della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione del GA</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2007</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 22 febbraio esce la sentenza della III sezione del Tar Puglia, Lecce, n.623, che si occupa della fattispecie in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la PA adotti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tardivamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento legittimo favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato, che dunque ha dovuto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attendere per sentirsi accogliere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’istanza a suo tempo presentata alla PA medesima. Per il Tar in queste ipotesi, laddove il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>invochi il danno da ritardato rilascio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento a lui favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il GA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non deve</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>limitarsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meramente accertare l’illegittimità formale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del provvedimento dal punto di vista della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione del termine procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma deve piuttosto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>acclarare se vi sia colpa</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>– apparato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimproverabilità del ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condotta pubblica inescusabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, magari </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scusata invece</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dallo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>stesso contegno del privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Come chiosa infatti la dottrina, occorre tenere presente il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rapporto di collaborazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che sovente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avvince la PA e il privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde il termine </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potrebbe essere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla seconda </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>superato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non già per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anomalie dell’azione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto piuttosto per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esigenze obiettive</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero perché magari </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conosce la complessità della fattispecie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nello svolgere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche informalmente</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>opera di persuasione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> finalizzata all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accoglibilità della propria istanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, finisce con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’indurre la PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> competente ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>maggiore ponderazione predecisionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 25 ottobre viene presentato in Senato il c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disegno di legge Nicolais</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, (dal nome dell’allora </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Ministro per le riforme e le innovazioni nella PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), che diviene </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Atto Senato n.1859</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e che prevede, tra le altre cose, una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibilità del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>indipendentemente</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> dalla </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>spettanza del beneficio</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> derivante dal </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>provvedimento richiesto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”: la previsione sembra dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ammettere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la risarcibilità di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.d. “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 31 ottobre esce la sentenza della III sezione del Tar Campania n.10329 alla cui stregua – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>imputabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>cause del ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può addurre</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giustificazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del proprio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>obbligo di provvedere rimasto inadempiuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (inerzia, silenzio) un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fatto interno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla propria </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>organizzazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, al punto da farlo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assurgere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> addirittura a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>causa di forza maggiore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ossia ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>vis maior cui resisti non potest</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in grado di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>far venire meno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il proprio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dovere istituzionale di provvedere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sull’istanza del privato. D’altronde, prosegue il Tar, anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>secondo il diritto comune</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>causa non imputabile</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” ex </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.1218 c.c.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> idonea come tale ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esonerare il debitore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità per inadempimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> deve intendersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quell’impedimento assolutamente imprevedibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>estraneo alla sfera</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del debitore medesimo, e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale che egli non avrebbe potuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in alcun modo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prevederlo e controllarlo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, mentre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni altro evento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tale da rendere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più oneroso o difficoltoso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’adempimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non potrebbe</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in ogni caso, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esentare il debitore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> medesimo da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> facendo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>venir meno l’inadempimento colpevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2009</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 12 giugno esce la sentenza della I sezione del Tar Lombardia n.4005 che assume </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibile il danno da mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> perpetrato dalla PA: si tratta di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pronuncia importante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che viene pubblicata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>qualche giorno prima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del varo della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n.69.09</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la quale, nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>novellare la legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> intoducendovi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, parrà (almeno secondo una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>parte della dottrina</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) ammettere ormai proprio il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> prodotto da un “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” nell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adozione di un provvedimento </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex parte publica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quand’anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato istante e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sganciato dalla spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal medesimo privato istante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bacino procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel quale il ritardo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si è consumato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 18 giugno viene varata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la legge n.69</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, recante disposizioni per lo sviluppo economico, la semplificazione, la competitivita' nonche' in materia di processo civile, il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.7, comma 1, lettera c)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inserisce nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articolo 2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rubricato “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>conseguenze per il </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ritardo dell'amministrazione</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> nella conclusione del procedimento</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, alla cui stregua (comma 1) le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pubbliche amministrazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggetti di cui all'articolo 1, comma 1-ter</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sono (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>genericamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e in modo, almeno all’apparenza, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>onnicomprensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tenuti al risarcimento del danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cagionato in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguenza dell'inosservanza dolosa o colposa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e (comma 2) le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pertinenti controversie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sono attribuite alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva del giudice amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> prescrizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del pertinente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del danno fissata in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>5 anni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. La norma sembra prevedere la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibilità anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del danno da “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, prodottosi in conseguenza della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata adozione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nei termini di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento della PA quale che sia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato in termini di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta spettanza dell’anelato bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 31 agosto esce la sentenza della II sezione del Tar Puglia n.2031 onde, da una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prima lettura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovo art.2.bis della legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, potrebbe pur affermarsi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non priva di fondamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una interpretazione della ridetta norma nel senso della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ormai ammissibile risarcibilità del c.d. danno da mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, come tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sganciato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in capo al privato istante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’utilità finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cui egli anela.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2010</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 2 luglio viene varato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legislativo n.104</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nuovo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>codice del processo amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.30</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>supera</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudiziale amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia con riguardo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’annullamento dell’atto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudiziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, appunto, rispetto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesta di risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> prodotti dall’atto stesso), sia con riguardo alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità del “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>silenzio</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” dell’Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (rispetto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesta di risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> prodotti dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex parte publica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che da quel “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>silenzio</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è scaturito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">). Importante anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.117</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che prevede un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rito speciale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> attivabile dal privato in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inerzia della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, dunque, avverso il c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: attraverso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale forma di tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>può ottenere dalla PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’adozione di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento espresso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che, nondimeno, giunge </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scadenza del termine procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e che può dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dare la stura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove si tratti di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento (legittimo) sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguimento del provvedimento favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>connesso bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che vi si riannette) laddove si tratti di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento (legittimo) favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, circostanza </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quest’ultima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che, a seconda delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>opzioni abbracciate</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, può essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da sola sufficiente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per affermare una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero può costituire </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il presupposto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>predicare tale responsabilità pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concorso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>altri indefettibili elementi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> collegati alle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concrete ragioni del ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (che potrebbero essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giustificate</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero all’opposto costituire il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prodotto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dolo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chi ha agito per l’Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">). L'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 4, comma 1, n. 14)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Allegato 4</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del codice </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>abroga poi il comma 2 dell'art. 2-bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, riaffermando la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sui danni da ritardo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’art.133, comma 1, lettera a) n.1</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che devolve appunto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> le controversie in materia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cagionato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in conseguenza dell’inosservanza dolosa o colposa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di conclusione del procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>senza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che tuttavia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.30</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del medesimo codice riproduca </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche il termine di prescrizione quinquennale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda di risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cagionati dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, già previsto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dall’ormai integralmente abrogato art.2.bis, comma 2</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della legge 241.90; piuttosto, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 3 del </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">ridetto</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> art.30 c.p.a.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> prevede che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda di risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei danni per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è proposta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>entro il termine di decadenza di 120 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> decorrente dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giorno in cui il fatto si è verificato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ovvero dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conoscenza del provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno deriva direttamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da questo, mentre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex professo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>successivo comma 4</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> statuisce che per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dell’eventuale danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il ricorrente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comprovi di aver subito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inosservanza dolosa o colposa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di cui al comma 3</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e dunque il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di 120 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non decorre</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fintanto che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perduri l’inadempimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, iniziando piuttosto a decorrere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo dopo 1 anno dalla scadenza del termine</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>per provvedere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo dopo 1 anno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da quando </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è scaduto per la PA il termine procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> decorre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di 120 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per far valere il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dell’eventuale, comprovato danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte del privato.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2011</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 24 marzo esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.1796 alla cui stregua la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condanna della PA al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> subito dal privato per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>omesso esercizio di un potere autoritativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termini prefissati dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> presuppone il riconoscimento del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto del ricorrente al bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inutilmente richiesto, e la relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione sulla pertinente spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nelle materie in cui la PA dispone di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ampia discrezionalità amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non solo tecnica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> può essere affidata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ad un giudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, necessariamente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, del GA, presupponendo piuttosto che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riesercitato il potere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad essa affidato, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>abbia riconosciuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato il bene della vita medesimo; onde atteso che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>per poter accedere alla risarcibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la lesione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>deve incidere sul bene della vita finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che funge da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostrato materiale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è possibile configurare una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela risarcitoria degli interessi c.d. procedimentali puri</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mere aspettative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardi procedimentali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fatta salva l’applicazione, quando del caso, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 15 dicembre esce la sentenza del IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n. 6609 che, inserendosi nel solco dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>orientamento maggioritario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nega</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la configurabilità nel sistema (anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dopo l’avvento dell’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) di un danno c.d. “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, che prescinda dunque dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in capo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed interlocutore procedimentale della PA.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2012</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 23 febbraio esce la sentenza della VI sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.1015 alla cui stregua, in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che veda </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>coinvolte diverse Pubbliche Amministrazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> può </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ricomprendere anche gli effetti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (pregiudizievoli) che il ritardo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>abbia prodotto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sull’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esito di procedimenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che siano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>collegati</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a quello in cui esso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è specificamente maturato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 9 marzo esce la sentenza del Tar Umbria n.80 che, inserendosi nel solco dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>orientamento maggioritario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nega</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la configurabilità nel sistema (anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dopo l’avvento dell’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) di un danno c.d. “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, che prescinda dunque dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in capo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed interlocutore procedimentale della PA.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 14 maggio esce la sentenza della I sezione del Tar Calabria n.450 onde, laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>manchi una pronuncia della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, seppure </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tardiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, di natura </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>positiva o negativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato istante, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico sul bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, per conseguenza, sull’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>entità del danno lamentato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal privato che abbia agito per ottenere il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, diventa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>particolarmente complessa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in fattispecie di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attività discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in tal caso infatti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il GA deve valutare gli elementi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che, in base ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice ed evidente presunzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mera operazione probabilistica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, avrebbero condotto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’assunzione di un provvedimento favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avesse rispettato il termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si fosse comunque determinata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>evitando</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tuttavia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sconfinare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in considerazioni di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>opportunità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (riservate come tali </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alla PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> medesima).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 22 giugno viene varato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legge n. 83</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, recante misure urgenti per la crescita del Paese, il cui art.18, comma 5, prescrive – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concessione di benefici economici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – che a decorrere dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1° gennaio 2013</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per le concessioni di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vantaggi economici successivi all'entrata in vigore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del decreto-legge ridetto, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pubblicazione</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>via internet</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai sensi appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’art. 18</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>amministrazione aperta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) costituisce </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condizione legale di efficacia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolo legittimante</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concessioni ed attribuzioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>importo complessivo superiore a mille euro</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel corso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell'anno solare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, siccome previste dal comma 1, la relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eventuale omissione o incompletezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dovendo essere rilevata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>d'ufficio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dagli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>organi dirigenziali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di controllo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sotto la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>propria diretta responsabilità amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>patrimoniale e contabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l'indebita concessione o attribuzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del beneficio economico. La </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata, incompleta o ritardata pubblicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e' altresì rilevabile </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dal destinatario della prevista concessione o attribuzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chiunque altro vi abbia interesse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ai fini</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte dell'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ai sensi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell'articolo 30 del codice del processo amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di cui al decreto legislativo 2 luglio 2010, n. 104. </span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 7 agosto viene varata la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n.134</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>converte in legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con modificazioni, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legge n.83.</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2013</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 26 febbraio esce la sentenza del Tar Basilicata n.83, alla cui stregua, onde ammettere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabile la responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e la conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insorgenza di un pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche la valutazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’elemento soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non può essere affidata al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice dato obiettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il quale il provvedimento finale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è stato adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque al solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procrastinarsi del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine fissato dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo essere piuttosto dimostrato che la PA abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>agito con dolo o colpa grave</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 7 marzo esce la sentenza della IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.1406, alla cui stregua – secondo l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>orientamento minoritario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – va affermato che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (siccome introdotto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nel 2009</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) presuppone </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche il tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> essere un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il cittadino, dovendosi dunque assumere sulla base di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale disposizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo nella conclusione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in un procedimento configura un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>costo sempre e in ogni caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dal momento che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattore tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> costituisce una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>essenziale variabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>predisposizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e nell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attuazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>piani finanziari</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> relativi a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>qualsiasi intervento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, condizionandone la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>relativa convenienza economica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Da ciò discende che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusione del procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato rispetto di tempi certi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella gestione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sequenza procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> configurano (potenzialmente) un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> atteggiandosi, sul crinale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>economico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>costo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che incide sulle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prospettive</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aspettative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scelte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> degli interlocutori privati, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condizionandone la vita e l’attività</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed incidendo negativamente sulla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>convenienza economica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle scelte </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ab ovo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> divisate</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; ciò tanto laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il bene preteso dal privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> risulti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alfine dovuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel caso in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risulti alfine negato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sol che si consideri come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’incertezza sull’esito procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che si protragga </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>oltre i confini previsti dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la relativa conclusione è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>idonea ad impedire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, o comunque a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rendere più complessa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>predisposizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>programmi o scelte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> diverse o alternative.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 14 marzo viene varato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legislativo n.33</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, recante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riordino della disciplina</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> riguardante gli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>obblighi di pubblicità, trasparenza e diffusione di informazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>PPAA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.53, comma 1, lettera t)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> abroga </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.18</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legge n.83 del 2012</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ribadendo tuttavia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contestualmente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.26, comma 3</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concessione di benefici economici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pubblicazione</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>via internet</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai sensi appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’art. 26 </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>obblighi di pubblicazione</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> degli atti di </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>concessione di sovvenzioni, contributi, sussidi e</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> attribuzione di </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>vantaggi economici</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> a persone fisiche ed enti pubblici e privati</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) costituisce </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condizione legale di efficacia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolo legittimante</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concessioni ed attribuzioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>importo complessivo superiore a mille euro</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel corso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell'anno solare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previste dal comma 1, la relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eventuale omissione o incompletezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dovendo essere rilevata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>d'ufficio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dagli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>organi dirigenziali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di controllo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sotto la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>propria diretta responsabilità amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>patrimoniale e contabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l'indebita concessione o attribuzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del beneficio economico. La </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata, incompleta o ritardata pubblicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e' altresì rilevabile </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dal destinatario della prevista concessione o attribuzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chiunque altro abbia interesse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ai fini</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte dell'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ai sensi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell'articolo 30 del codice del processo amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di cui al decreto legislativo 2 luglio 2010, n. 104. </span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 21 giugno viene varato il decreto legge n.69, il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articolo 28, comma 9</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, aggiunge un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 1.bis </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 2.bis della legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla cui stregua, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fatto salvo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quanto previsto dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 1</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ad esclusione delle ipotesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio qualificato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concorsi pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inosservanza del termine di conclusione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del procedimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ad istanza di parte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per il quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sussiste l'obbligo di pronunziarsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, l'istante ha </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto di ottenere un indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condizioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e con le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>modalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> stabilite dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sulla base della legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, da un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regolamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> emanato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ai sensi dell'articolo 17, comma 2</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della legge 23 agosto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1988, n. 400, </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">in tal caso le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>somme corrisposte o da corrispondere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a titolo di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dovendo essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>detratte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eventuale risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Il successivo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 10</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articolo 28</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del decreto legge in parola prevede tuttavia – quanto a concreto ambito applicativo - che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni disposizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del ridetto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articolo 28</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche il comma 9</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) si applica, in via </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sperimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dalla data di entrata in vigore della legge di conversione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del decreto medesimo, ai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimenti amministrativi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> relativi all'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avvio e all'esercizio dell'attività di impresa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> iniziati </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>successivamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla detta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>data di entrata in vigore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Stando al successivo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 12</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, decorsi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>18 mesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>entrata in vigore della legge di conversione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del decreto e sulla base del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>monitoraggio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> relativo alla relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>applicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regolamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> emanato ai sensi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell'articolo 17, comma 2, della legge 23 agosto 1988, n. 400</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, su </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proposta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Ministro per la pubblica amministrazione e la semplificazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concerto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Ministro dell'economia e delle finanze</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, viene stabilita la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conferma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimodulazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche con riguardo ai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimenti amministrativi esclusi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, o la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>cessazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle disposizioni del medesimo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articolo 28</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nonché eventualmente il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine a decorrere dal quale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> le disposizioni ivi contenute </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sono applicate</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche gradualmente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimenti amministrativi diversi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da quelli individuati al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 10</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Poiché la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuova disposizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fa riferimento al “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>correlato indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> viene corrisposto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>a prescindere dall’esistenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, palesandosi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>preordinato a compensare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appunto il (solo) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero ritardo della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, assunto come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comportamento omissivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e tuttavia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel contesto di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bacino procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è ormai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spirato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Secondo il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovo assetto normativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 1 dell’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fa riferimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>expressis verbis</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cagionato in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguenza della inosservanza dolosa o colposa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno eventualmente inferto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato istante assume tale ritardo come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indefettibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e specifico </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposto causale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, mentre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>successivo comma 1.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si applica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indipendentemente dalla causazione di un danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per effetto del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (assunto come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto lecito dannoso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA), con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scomputo dell’eventuale indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (già percepito) dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>posta risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>agisca (anche) a titolo risarcitorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nei confronti della PA cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> vada per avventura addebitato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>a titolo di illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Dal punto di vista </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quantitativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il privato istante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>può chiedere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a titolo di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>somma pari a 30 Euro</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni giorno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per l’appunto, di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>totale comunque non superiore a 2000 Euro complessivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, a decorrere dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giorno di scadenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in termini </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedurali </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(comma 2), al fine di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ottenere l'indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, l'istante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>e' tenuto ad azionare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere sostitutivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previsto dall'art. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2, comma 9-bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n. 241 del 1990</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine decadenziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>7 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scadenza del termine di conclusione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del procedimento, in tal caso i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggetti privati che esercitano pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> poteri di cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all'articolo 1, comma 1-ter</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della medesima legge essendo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tenuti all’uopo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad individuare il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabile del potere sostitutivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Stando al successivo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 3</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, (solo) nel caso in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche il titolare del potere sostitutivo non adotti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il divisato provvedimento nel termine o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non liquidi l'indennizzo maturato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a tale data, l'istante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>può proporre ricorso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai sensi dell'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articolo 117</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del codice del processo amministrativo (ricorso avverso il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) oppure, ricorrendone i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dell'articolo 118 dello stesso codice (ricorso per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto ingiuntivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, al fine di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vedersi liquidato l’indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); peraltro (comma 4) nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all'articolo 117</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.p.a. (avverso il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), l’istante privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>può proporre</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>congiuntamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al ricorso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avverso il silenzio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - domanda per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ottenere l'indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed in tal caso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche tale domanda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e' trattata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>con rito camerale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e decisa con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sentenza in forma semplificata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Ai sensi del successivo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 6</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, se il ricorso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>e' dichiarato inammissibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>e' respinto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in relazione all'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inammissibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>manifesta infondatezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell'istanza che ha </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dato avvio al procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il giudice, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pronuncia immediatamente esecutiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, condanna il ricorrente a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pagare in favore del resistente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (la PA) una somma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da 2 volte a 4 volte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il contributo unificato, disposizione intesa a scongiurare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>liti temerarie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Ai sensi dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>successivi comma 7 e 8</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, mentre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex post</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la pronuncia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condanna a carico dell'amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e' comunicata, a cura della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Segreteria del giudice che l'ha pronunciata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Corte dei Conti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>controllo di gestione sulla pubblica amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Procuratore regionale della Corte dei Conti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per le valutazioni di competenza, nonché al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolare dell'azione disciplinare verso i dipendenti pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> interessati dal procedimento amministrativo (ancorché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non si tratti di sentenza in giudicato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche nel caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice sentenza di primo grado soggetta ad appello</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, a differenza di quanto accade nelle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattispecie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ricorso avverso il silenzio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>senza richiesta di indennizzo per ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che devono essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trasmesse telematicamente alla Corte dei Conti</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in giudicato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ex </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2, comma 8</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della legge 241.90, siccome </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>novellato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legge n.5.12</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex ante</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comunicazione di avvio del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e nelle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>informazioni sul procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> pubblicate </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ai sensi dell'articolo 35</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del decreto legislativo 14 marzo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2013, n. 33</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e' </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fatta menzione del diritto all'indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nonché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>delle modalità e dei termini</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguirlo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed e' altresì indicato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggetto cui e' attribuito il potere sostitutivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termini a questo assegnati</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la conclusione del procedimento. Quello stesso giorno esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.3405, alla cui stregua, onde ammettere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabile la responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e la conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insorgenza di un pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche la valutazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’elemento soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non può essere affidata al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice dato obiettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il quale il provvedimento finale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è stato adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque al solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procrastinarsi del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine fissato dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo essere piuttosto dimostrato che la PA abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>agito con dolo o colpa grave</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 9 agosto viene varata la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n.98</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>converte in legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con modificazioni, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legge n.69</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. La legge </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>novella l’art.28</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del decreto legge ridetto disciplinando la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesta di indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>particolare caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in cui al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento del cui ritardo si tratta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> intervengano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più Amministrazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Inoltre, per il privato istante il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine perentorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azionare il potere sostitutivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudiziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di adire il GA per ottenerne la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pertinente tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, viene </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>elevato da 7 a 20 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 21 agosto esce la sentenza della IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.4228, alla cui stregua, onde ammettere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabile la responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e la conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insorgenza di un pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche la valutazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’elemento soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non può essere affidata al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice dato obiettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il quale il provvedimento finale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è stato adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque al solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procrastinarsi del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine fissato dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo essere piuttosto dimostrato che la PA abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>agito con dolo o colpa grave</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 4 settembre esce la sentenza del IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n. 4452 che, inserendosi nel solco dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>orientamento maggioritario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nega</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la configurabilità nel sistema (anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dopo l’avvento dell’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) di un danno c.d. “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, che prescinda dunque dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in capo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed interlocutore procedimentale della PA. Peraltro, onde ammettere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabile la responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e la conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insorgenza di un pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche la valutazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’elemento soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non può essere affidata al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice dato obiettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il quale il provvedimento finale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è stato adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque al solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procrastinarsi del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine fissato dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo essere piuttosto dimostrato che la PA abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>agito con dolo o colpa grave</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2014</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 9 gennaio viene varata la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Direttiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Dipartimento della Funzione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dettante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>linee guida</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’applicazione dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennizzo da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusione dei procedimenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>istanza di parte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. In quella medesima data viene varata anche la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Direttiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Ministro per la Pubblica Amministrazione e la Semplificazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> recante, del pari, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>linee guida</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sull’applicazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’art. 28 del <a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/p/13/2013-69.htm">D.L. n. 69 del 2013</a></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nella parte in cui ha introdotto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusione dei procedimenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>istanza di parte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 31 gennaio esce la sentenza della III sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.468 alla cui stregua l</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattispecie risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel provvedere da parte della P.A. trova </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>specifica disciplina</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art 2 bis della </b></span><a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/uploads1/webdata_pro.pl?_cgifunction=form&_layout=legislazione1&keyval=legislazione.legislazione_id=1015"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n. 241 del 1990</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, a tenor del quale le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pubbliche amministrazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggetti di cui all’art. 1, comma 1 ter</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della legge medesima, sono </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tenuti al risarcimento del danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cagionato dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inosservanza dolosa o colposa del termine di conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; si tratta per il Collegio di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disposizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela in sé il bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inerente alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>certezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattore tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rapporti giuridici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che vedono </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>come parte la P.A</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">., stante la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ricaduta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il ritardo a provvedere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>può avere sullo svolgimento di attività ed iniziative economiche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> condizionate alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione positiva della P.A.,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ovvero alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimozione di limiti di rilievo pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>espletamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> riceve </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>qualificazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sul piano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>oggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inosservanza del termine ordinamentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; sul crinale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il ritardo deve essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ascrivibile ad un’inosservanza dolosa o colposa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termini di legge o di regolamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> stabiliti per l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adozione dell’atto terminale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del pertinente procedimento. Per il Collegio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tuttavia essere riconosciuto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilascio di una autorizzazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (nella specie, una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autorizzazione regionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attivazione di un ambulatorio PET-TAC</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, negata) nel caso in cui: a) il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diniego di rilascio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia giustificato dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>succedersi nel tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diverse normative generali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>piano programmatorio e pianificatorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, di guisa che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non emergono gli estremi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condotta colpevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’Amministrazione competente ed il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dall’esito del giudizio di primo grado</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, conforme alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scelta provvedimentale dell’Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>segno negativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, come tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impeditivo di ogni determinazione favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda della ditta ricorrente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fino alla definizione del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio di appello</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; b) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> vi sia stata, a seguito della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sentenza di appello</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di accoglimento del ricorso, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione del termine a provvedere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilascio del titolo autorizzatorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 28 febbraio esce la sentenza della III sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.943, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">che assume </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>confortabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda di risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il fatto che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento di aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una gara sia intervenuto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>a distanza di tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (nella specie, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dopo 1 anno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avvio del pertinente procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ove ciò sia dipeso dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>stazione appaltante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, essendo decorso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un lasso di tempo giustificato solo in parte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ricerca di una soluzione più economica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Nel caso di specie, in applicazione dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 28, comma 1</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della <a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/n/2529.htm">L. 9 agosto </a></span><a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/n/2529.htm"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2013, n. 98</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il Collegio assume come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’indennizzo per il mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – pari ad una somma di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>30 euro</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni giorno di ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non possa comunque complessivamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>superiore a 2.000 euro</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 2 aprile esce la sentenza della III sezione del Tar Lazio n.3643, alla cui stregua il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivante dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato esercizio nei termini di legge di un determinato potere autoritativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, implica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi legittimi pretensivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>cognizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> deve intendersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>affidata alla giurisdizione esclusiva del GA.</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 30 aprile esce la sentenza della III sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.2279, alla cui stregua – secondo l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>orientamento minoritario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – va affermato che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (siccome introdotto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nel 2009</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) presuppone </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche il tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> essere un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il cittadino, dovendosi dunque assumere sulla base di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale disposizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo nella conclusione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in un procedimento configura un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>costo sempre e in ogni caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dal momento che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattore tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> costituisce una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>essenziale variabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>predisposizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e nell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attuazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>piani finanziari</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> relativi a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>qualsiasi intervento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, condizionandone la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>relativa convenienza economica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Da ciò discende che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusione del procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato rispetto di tempi certi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella gestione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sequenza procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> configurano (potenzialmente) un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> atteggiandosi, sul crinale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>economico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>costo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che incide sulle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prospettive</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aspettative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scelte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> degli interlocutori privati, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condizionandone la vita e l’attività</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed incidendo negativamente sulla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>convenienza economica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle scelte </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ab ovo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> divisate</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; ciò tanto laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il bene preteso dal privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> risulti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alfine dovuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel caso in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risulti alfine negato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sol che si consideri come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’incertezza sull’esito procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che si protragga </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>oltre i confini previsti dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la relativa conclusione è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>idonea ad impedire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, o comunque a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rendere più complessa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>predisposizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>programmi o scelte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> diverse o alternative.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 22 maggio esce la sentenza della IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.2638 alla cui stregua </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’introduzione nel 2013</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennizzo per mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di cui all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2 bis, comma 1.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ha confermato la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura strettamente risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previsto dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>precedente comma 1</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che dunque – quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>copre</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, riconducibile ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto lecito dannoso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e ristorabile ormai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giusta indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai sensi del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 1.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 10 giugno esce la sentenza della IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.2964, alla cui stregua il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivante dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato esercizio nei termini di legge di un determinato potere autoritativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, implica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi legittimi pretensivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>cognizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> deve intendersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>affidata alla giurisdizione esclusiva del GA.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> Sul crinale sostanziale poi, inserendosi nel solco dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>orientamento maggioritario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il Collegio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nega</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la configurabilità nel sistema (anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dopo l’avvento dell’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) di un danno c.d. “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, che prescinda dunque dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in capo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed interlocutore procedimentale della PA.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 30 dicembre esce la sentenza della II sezione del Tar Puglia, n.1703, secondo la quale a</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">lla categoria del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in cui è incorsa la P.A. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nell’esercizio dell’attività amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, in particolare, nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilascio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, possono essere ricondotte sostanzialmente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>3 ipotesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero: 1) l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adozione tardiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato interessato; 2) l’adozione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tardiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un provvedimento (legittimo) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; 3) la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mera inerzia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ossia la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata adozione </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>tout court</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del provvedimento divisato. Fatta questa premessa sistematica, per il Tar va assunta confortabile la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda di risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avanzata nei confronti di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Comune</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>società</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> operante nel settore degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impianti pubblicitari</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> allorché l’Ente locale – in disparte la circostanza che non </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha ancora adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Nuovo Piano Generale degli Impianti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> –</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">abbia comunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>omesso di esaminare</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tempestivamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> numerose </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domande</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> presentate dalla società stessa di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autorizzazione all’installazione degli impianti pubblicitari</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel territorio comunale e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non abbia terminato la relativa istruttoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termini di legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilasciando</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> le relative autorizzazioni con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>grave ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>data di presentazione della domanda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e soltanto a seguito di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>due ordinanze cautelari del G.A.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>apposita nomina del commissario </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ad acta,</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in tal caso la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dovendosi assumere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fondata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> atteso come, per un verso, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’avvenuto rilascio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle autorizzazioni da parte del commissario </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ad acta</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inconfutabilmente ritenuto spettante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla società interessata il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita effettivamente anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e per l’altro, come sussista la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione dei fondamentali principi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cui deve essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conformata l’attività amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ex</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 97 Cost.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (quali </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’imparzialità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il buon andamento,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre che dei pertinenti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>corollari</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>economicità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>speditezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>efficienza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>buona fede</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela dell’affidamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); tale illegittima condotta non può – per il Tar - che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ascriversi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto meno, a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>grave negligenza o imperizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>uffici dell’Amministrazione comunale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> complessivamente considerati (e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’Ente locale come apparato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2015</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 12 gennaio esce la sentenza della I sezione del Tar Lombardia n.94 alla cui stregua va </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riconosciuta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la configurabilità del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ex </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (siccome introdotto nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2009</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), dovendo essere valorizzato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattore “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>tempo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene autonomo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed essendosi peraltro al cospetto di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattispecie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contrattuale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 5 febbraio esce la sentenza della III sezione del Tar Lazio n.2142 alla cui stregua </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’introduzione nel 2013</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennizzo per mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di cui all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2 bis, comma 1.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ha confermato la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura strettamente risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previsto dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>precedente comma 1</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che dunque – quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>copre</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, riconducibile ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto lecito dannoso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e ristorabile ormai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giusta indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai sensi del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 1.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Per il Tar l’art.2.bis </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>espressamente ammette al risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> qualificato come “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, ovvero quello che si verifica allorché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la dolosa o colposa inerzia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA – ed il conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - pregiudichi un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>effettiva pertinenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato, connesso dunque alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del pertinente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 14 aprile esce la sentenza della II sezione del Tar Campania, Salerno, n.811 alla cui stregua </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’introduzione nel 2013</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennizzo per mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di cui all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2 bis, comma 1.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ha confermato la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura strettamente risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previsto dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>precedente comma 1</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che dunque – quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>copre</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, riconducibile ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto lecito dannoso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e ristorabile ormai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giusta indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai sensi del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comma 1.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 13 maggio esce la sentenza della III sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.2410, alla cui stregua, onde ammettere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabile la responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e la conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insorgenza di un pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche la valutazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’elemento soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non può essere affidata al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice dato obiettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il quale il provvedimento finale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è stato adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque al solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procrastinarsi del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine fissato dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo essere piuttosto dimostrato che la PA abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>agito con dolo o colpa grave</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 17 giugno esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.3047, alla cui stregua, onde ammettere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabile la responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e la conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insorgenza di un pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche la valutazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’elemento soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non può essere affidata al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice dato obiettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il quale il provvedimento finale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è stato adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque al solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procrastinarsi del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine fissato dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo essere piuttosto dimostrato che la PA abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>agito con dolo o colpa grave</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 10 luglio esce la sentenza della III sezione del Tar Sicilia n.1687 alla cui stregua occorre muovere dal presupposto che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>va negato il risarcimento del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove difetti la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prova concreta di tutti i relativi presupposti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, tra i quali vanno in primo luogo annoverate le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condizioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta adozione dei provvedimenti omessi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, oltre che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’ammontare del preteso danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (tanta a titolo di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno emergente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lucro cessante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, giusta produzione di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fatture quietanzate</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conteggi comparativi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e così via), ed infine di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>preciso nesso causale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo e danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Con riguardo a quest’ultimo elemento (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prova del nesso causale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), il Collegio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nega tutela risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vincitore di un concorso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove, a procedura </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sia stato poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullato il bando</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> perché fondato su </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disposizione normativa non più applicabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>emanato in ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">): per il Tar in simili fattispecie va assunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insussistente il nesso causale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno lagnato dal ricorrente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e ciò alla stregua del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>principio di c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>regolarità causale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> onde devono assumersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibili i soli danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che costituiscano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguenze normalmente prevedibili</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fatto illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o dell’inadempimento).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 20 novembre esce la sentenza della II sezione del Tar Liguria n. 933 che, inserendosi nel solco dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>orientamento maggioritario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nega</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la configurabilità nel sistema (anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dopo l’avvento dell’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) di un danno c.d. “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, che prescinda dunque dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in capo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed interlocutore procedimentale della PA. Per il Collegio il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilascio del provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il termine finale procedimentale (e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) causa al destinatario un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>subordinatamente al fatto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che tale danno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sia provato nell’</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>an</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> e nel </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>quantum</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e che il ritardo sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>imputabile alla PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quanto meno a titolo di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2016</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">L’8 gennaio esce la sentenza della II sezione del Tar Liguria n.4 alla cui stregua il risarcimento dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danni per il ritardo dell’Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’adozione di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento dovuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - come evidenziato dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">giurisprudenza - può essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesto esclusivamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nelle ipotesi in cui sia stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>previamente accertato e dichiarato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal Giudice il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio inadempimento dell'amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (TAR Sicilia Palermo III 5 giugno 2015 n. 1316). E’ stato altresì affermato, rammenta il Tar, che in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, al fine del necessario </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accertamento della colposità dell'inerzia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dimostrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> incombe sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danneggiato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non è sufficiente la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sola violazione del termine massimo di durata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del procedimento amministrativo, poiché tale violazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di per sé non dimostra l'imputabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, potendo la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>particolare complessità della fattispecie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sopraggiungere di evenienze non imputabili all'amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> escludere la sussistenza della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Il comportamento dell'Amministrazione, inoltre, deve essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutato unitamente alla condotta dell'istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il quale riveste il ruolo di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>parte essenziale e attiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e in tale veste dispone di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>poteri idonei a incidere sulla tempistica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e sull'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del procedimento stesso, attraverso il ricorso ai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimedi amministrativi e giustiziali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> riconosciutigli dall'ordinamento giuridico, tra cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il rito del silenzio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che deve essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attivato con tempestività</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rilevando </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>altrimenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ai fini </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell'art. 1227 c.c.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (art. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>30</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.p.a.) in ordine all'accertamento della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spettanza del risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nonché alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quantificazione del danno risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (TAR Sicilia Palermo II 26 maggio 2015 n. 1243). In sostanza, per il Tar la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>previsione di cui all’art. 30 c.p.a.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (con particolare riguardo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concorso colposo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>creditore</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del provvedimento) deve ritenersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valevole anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della pubblica amministrazione; ne consegue che per ottenere il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> occorre una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>iniziativa del danneggiato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> volta a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fare risaltare l’inerzia dell’amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Tale ordine di idee è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conforme ai principi solidaristici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che informano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’ordinamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e che impongono di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attivarsi nel limite di un apprezzabile sacrificio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>evitare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione produttiva del danno si aggravi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>passare del tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Detto in altre parole, per il Tar </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è lecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’asserito danneggiato rimanga inerte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giovarsi dell’inerzia della p.a.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fini risarcitori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, occorrendo piuttosto, affinché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il danno possa essere risarcibile,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> un’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>iniziativa del danneggiato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>metta in mora l’amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e ciò soprattutto quando, come nel caso di specie, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>faccia difetto una espressa previsione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 22 marzo esce la sentenza della III sezione della Cassazione n.5621, onde – in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda di risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tardivo rilascio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autorizzazione amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, rilascio erogato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dopo l’annullamento di un provvedimento di diniego</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> intervenuto a distanza di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anni dall’originaria istanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – seppure la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prova del dolo o della colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA, della quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è onerato il danneggiato,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non possa desumersi dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sola illegittimità del provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, positivo o negativo, concretamente rilasciato, non possono nondimeno essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assunti sufficienti ad escludere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la configurabilità </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’elemento soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – quanto meno a titolo di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità colposa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – né </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’avvenuto annullamento di atti regolamentari generali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dello stesso ente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disciplinanti la materia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oggetto dell’autorizzazione, atteso l’obbligo della PA di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>organizzare la propria attività</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per assicurare il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tempestivo esame delle legittime aspettative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei privati, né la sussistenza di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>controverso elemento impeditivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al rilascio dell’autorizzazione, ove il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diniego</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, fondato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esclusivamente su quest’ultimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sia stato giudicato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo dal GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Per la Corte va dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>cassata con rinvio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una decisione che abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riconosciuto giustificabile un ritardo di 17 anni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’adozione di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento di autorizzazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> all’apertura di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autoscuola</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a causa di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>precedenti dinieghi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, poi dichiarati </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, motivati da un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>precedente penale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato istante, che aveva fatto assumere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insussistente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il requisito della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>buona condotta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 23 marzo esce la sentenza della II sezione del Tar Puglia-Lecce, n.549, onde a</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">lla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>categoria concettuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo della P.A.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (che trova oggi un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>addentellato normativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’art. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2 </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>bis</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/n/1015"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n. 241 del 1990</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sono riconducibili </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>3 distinte ipotesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: a) l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adozione tardiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento legittimo</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato interessato; b) l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adozione tardiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento legittimo favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato interessato; c) la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mera inerzia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e cioè la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata adozione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del provvedimento in parola. Tanto premesso, e scendendo alla fattispecie sottoposta al relativo vaglio, il Tar </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accoglie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la domanda di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> spiccata nei confronti della P.A. e scaturigine del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il quale un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Comune</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ha </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dapprima immotivatamente sospeso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e successivamente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>portato a termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>grave ed ingiustificato ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (5 anni dall’avvio) – quantunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>con esito favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avente ad oggetto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una istanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> presentata dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprietario di un terreno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e tendente ad ottenere il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilascio del permesso di costruire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la realizzazione di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impianto di distribuzione carburanti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con annesso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>punto di ristoro</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">IL 25 marzo esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n. 1239 alla cui stregua anche se i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termini per la conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione di impatto ambientale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (VIA) di cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’art. 20</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/n/1244"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>d.lgs. n. 152 del 2006</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (codice dell’ambiente) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non hanno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> natura di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termini perentori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, bensì piuttosto di termini </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ordinatori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – stante come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’inosservanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei medesimi non comporti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alcuna causa inficiante la validità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> né veruna </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguente illegittimità dei relativi atti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non recando seco </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alcuna decadenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’Amministrazione dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere di provvedere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, seppure </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tardivamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – nondimeno la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei ridetti termini implica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>effetti di altro genere </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">ed in particolare talune </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità disciplinari, penali, contabili </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">nonché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitorie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danni da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove siano presenti tutti i relativi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Per il Consiglio peraltro il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’adozione di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è da assumersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>elemento sufficiente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per configurare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un danno “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>obbligo di risarcimento</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ex parte publica</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nel caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> lesivo di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’amministrato, allorché tale procedimento sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da concludere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il destinatario ovvero comunque sussistano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fondate ragioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per ritenere che l’interessato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avrebbe dovuto ottenere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tale provvedimento favorevole; l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ingiustizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sussistenza stessa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo della P.A.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non possono peraltro, in linea di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>principio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presumersi </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>iuris tantum</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meccanica ed esclusiva relazione al ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’adozione del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento amministrativo favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo piuttosto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il soggetto danneggiato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ex</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 2697</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c., provare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutti gli elementi costitutivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della pertinente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendosi più in specie verificare la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sussistenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tanto dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposti di carattere oggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prova del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e del relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ammontare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ingiustizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dello stesso, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nesso causale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), tanto di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quello di carattere soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dolo o colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del danneggiante), onde il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>superamento</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” del termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fissato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ex lege</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o per via regolamentare) alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> costituisce </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indice oggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> senza tuttavia integrare “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>piena prova del danno</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” da ritardo medesimo. Per il Collegio, con riguardo alla specifica fattispecie sottopostagli, possono </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assumersi sussistenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esito favorevole del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedura di VIA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con l’emissione del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che ha consentito al privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’ottenimento del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’ampliamento dell’attività economica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da esso gestita, accompagnato da una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>palese ed oggettiva inosservanza dei termini procedimentali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giustificata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da rilievi da parte dell’Amministrazione, in sede </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero in sede </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudiziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>difficoltà oggettive di tipo tecnico o organizzativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreto affare trattato,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in simili evenienze </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dovendo considerarsi raggiunta la prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>elemento soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della pertinente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattispecie risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 12 aprile esce la sentenza della sezione II ter del Tar Lazio n.4329 che muove dalla considerazione onde </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>previsione dell’art. 2 </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>bis</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/n/1015"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">L. 241/1990</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - ai sensi del quale la P.A. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è tenuta al risarcimento del danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cagionato in conseguenza </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’inosservanza dolosa o colposa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di conclusione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del procedimento - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non costituisce</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattispecie autonoma di illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma è piuttosto da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ricondursi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più ampio </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>genus</b></i></span><i> </i><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illecito aquiliano</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’art. 2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c., di cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condivide gli elementi costitutivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della responsabilità, col precipitato onde </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’ingiustizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sussistenza stessa del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non possono, in linea di principio, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presumersi </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>iuris tantum</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meccanica ed esclusiva relazione al ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’adozione del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e ciò in quanto, diversamente opinando, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disposizione in questione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> varrebbe a configurare una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sanzione per il ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Per il Collegio poi, al fine di assumere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sussistente il danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della P.A., il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danneggiato deve</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ex</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 2697</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c., </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la sussistenza di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutti gli elementi costitutivi della relativa domanda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, in particolare, sia dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposti di carattere oggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prova del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e del relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ammontare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ingiustizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dello stesso, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nesso causale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), sia di quelli di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>carattere soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dolo o colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del danneggiante pubblico), palesandosi in particolare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>necessaria la dimostrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della sussistenza dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>elemento soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della responsabilità, non potendo ritenersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sussistente la responsabilità della P.A.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in applicazione di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero automatismo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (anche quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mera presunzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) in base al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo dato oggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità del provvedimento adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo ed ingiustificato procrastinarsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adozione del provvedimento finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Il Collegio considera come il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia soggetto ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine naturale e ragionevole di conclusione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> variamente fissato nei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regolamenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> applicabili a ciascuna fattispecie, o, in mancanza, regolato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in via residuale dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e la cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inosservanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove comporti un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a carico dell’istante, obbliga la P.A. al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pertinente risarcimento,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> confrontandosi in giurisprudenza sul punto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diversi orientamenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, tra i quali </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>uno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è volto a considerare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’interesse alla tempestiva conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> come un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene giuridico a sé stante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela il fattore tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>elemento del patrimonio del privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (il quale ha dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto ad una risposta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tempi ragionevoli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte della P.A., </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quale che sia il relativo contenuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di merito, ovvero sia per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>istanze fondate</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che per istanze infondate); ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un altro</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> secondo cui il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è dovuto – al cospetto di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>specifici presupposti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fondatezza della pertinente pretesa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. In entrambi i casi nondimeno, per il Tar </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non appare configurabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero automatismo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità del silenzio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposto soggettivo della tutela aquiliana</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diversamente opinando</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si trasformerebbe il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>misura ripristinatoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione giuridica lesa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) in una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>forma esclusiva di sanzione,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quest’ultima muovendo da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposti del tutto diversi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, specie in punto di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quantificazione della misura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del dovuto, che dovrebbe essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>predeterminato per legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o comunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>determinabile</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sulla base della legge stessa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Scendendo alla fattispecie concreta scandagliata, per il Tar </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può essere accolta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la domanda – spiccata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nei confronti della P.A.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vincitori di un concorso pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – e volta ad ottenere il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno derivante dal ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il quale gli stessi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sono stati assunti alle dipendenze dell’Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> medesima, nel caso in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>determinato dalla scelta della P.A.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attendere l’esito del contenzioso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> promosso dagli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>istanti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avverso i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimenti di autotutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> adottati dall’Amministrazione in merito alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>medesima procedura concorsuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in relazione a tale scelta, infatti, sotto il profilo della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della P.A.,</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è sicuramente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ascrivibile una colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> od </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una negligenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> all’apparato amministrativo, configurandosi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>uno di quei naturali imprevisti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che possono determinare un</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> rallentamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusione del procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. La scelta della P.A. di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proseguire o non proseguire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il procedimento in presenza di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contenzioso pendente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – chiosa il Tar - ancorché sulla base di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atti o provvedimenti impugnati e non sospesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è, secondo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comune esperienza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scelta da compiersi caso per caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e secondo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ragionevolezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, soppesando i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diversi interessi in conflitto,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non essendo dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>censurabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in termini di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colpevolezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ai fini del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la decisione di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attendere l’esito di un giudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>incide sul procedimento in corso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove da tale procedimento scaturisca </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’assunzione all’impiego dei vincitori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, o comunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’instaurarsi di un rapporto durevole di collaborazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con la P.A., posto che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’eventuale soccombenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> potrebbe determinare, nel caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avvenuta instaurazione del rapporto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> durante la pendenza del giudizio, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>delicate conseguenze funzionali ed economiche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al venir meno, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>effetto retroattivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolo stesso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del rapporto.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 21 aprile esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.1584 alla cui stregua il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA deve assumersi avere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>connotati “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>aquiliani</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; come tale, esso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può essere presunto o ipotetico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo essere piuttosto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rigorosamente provato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da chi lo invoca in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutti i relativi elementi costitutivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ex art.</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2967</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c., in combinato disposto con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2017</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 12 gennaio esce la sentenza della I sezione del Tar Campania, Salerno, n.87, che assume </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accoglibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda di risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avanzata nei confronti di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un Comune</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e derivante dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo, grave ed ingiustificato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con il quale è stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>portato a termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (nella specie, dopo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>10 anni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal pertinente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avvio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avente ad oggetto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una istanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, presentata dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprietario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>manufatto abitativo e</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tendente ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ottenere il rilascio del permesso di costruire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ampliamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del medesimo manufatto; in materia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – chiosa il Tar - spetta a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colui</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assume di essere danneggiato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fornire, e in modo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rigoroso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prova dell’esistenza del pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> denunciato, specie se di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura patrimoniale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, poiché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nell’azione di responsabilità per danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>principio dispositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> opera con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pienezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è temperato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>metodo acquisitivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> proprio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’azione di annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dato che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non si riscontra alcuna asimmetria informativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Amministrazione e privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ma, anzi, opera il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>principio della c.d. vicinanza della prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che determina il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riespandersi del predetto principio dispositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sancito, in generale, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dall’art. 2697 comma 1</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, c.c.; né è ammessa per il Tar la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione equitativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, prevista dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 1226</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c., perché essa presuppone che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risulti comunque comprovata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’esistenza di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, fatta salva la presenza di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazioni di impossibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>estrema difficoltà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) di presentare una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>puntuale prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> solo sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>preciso ammontare del danno subito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 7 febbraio esce la sentenza della VII sezione del Tar Campania n.770 alla cui stregua il riconoscimento della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tardivo esercizio della funzione amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – danno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – richiede, oltre alla constatazione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perpetrata violazione dei termini procedimentali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche l’accertamento che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’inosservanza delle cadenze procedimentali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>imputabile a colpa o dolo della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> medesima, che il danno lamentato è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguenza diretta ed immediata del ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’Amministrazione in parola e che sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>data prova dal privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> istante del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno subito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal ritardo.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 17 luglio esce la sentenza della II sezione del Tar Campania, Salerno, n.1223, che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accoglie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la domanda spiccata da un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>imprenditore commerciale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nei confronti di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Comune</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed intesa ad ottenere il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> subito in conseguenza del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il quale è stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concluso il procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avente ad oggetto la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesta di un permesso di costruire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’ampliamento di un fabbricato a destinazione commerciale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nel caso in cui: a) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’istanza tendente ad ottenere il rilascio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’atto di assenso edificatorio sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>divenuta improcedibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a causa della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>entrata in vigore del <a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/n/2012">D.p.r. 7 settembre 2010 n. 160</a></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, secondo cui, a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decorrere dal 30 settembre 2011</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è più possibile avvalersi del Suap</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’autorizzazione all’apertura delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>medie e grandi strutture commerciali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; b) la parte istante abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dato idonea dimostrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>medesima istanza sarebbe stata accolta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se il procedimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si fosse concluso tempestivamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2018</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 2 gennaio esce la sentenza della VI sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.12, che premette come la regola del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ne bis in idem</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, applicabile anche al processo amministrativo, presupponga l’identità nei due giudizi delle parti in causa e degli elementi identificativi dell’azione proposta, e quindi che nei suddetti giudizi sia chiesto l’annullamento degli stessi provvedimenti, o al più di provvedimenti diversi ma legati da uno stretto vincolo di consequenzialità in quanto inerenti ad un medesimo rapporto, sulla base di identici motivi di impugnazione, onde al fine di reputare sussistente la violazione del principio del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ne bis in idem</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è necessario rilevare l’identità nei due giudizi delle parti in causa e degli elementi identificativi dell’azione risarcitoria proposta. Sulla base di tali presupposti, per il Collegio la parte che, in sede di decisione giurisdizionale, non abbia ottenuto dal giudice adito il risarcimento del danno richiesto non può riproporre con un giudizio di ottemperanza il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>petitum</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che gli era stato espressamente negato dalla sentenza ottemperanda, ostandovi non solo il ridetto principio del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ne bis in idem</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma anche i confini propri del giudizio di ottemperanza medesimo. Sul crinale sostanziale, per il Collegio l’’intervenuto riconoscimento, da parte della PA di aver pronunciato in ritardo su alcune istanze non comporta, per ciò solo, l’affermazione della relativa responsabilità per “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>danno ingiusto</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” risarcibile ai sensi dell’art. 2043 c.c., dovendosi per esso intendere non qualsiasi perdita economica, ma solo la perdita economica ingiusta, ovvero verificatasi con modalità contrarie al diritto; ne consegue per il Collegio la necessità, per chiunque pretenda un risarcimento, di dimostrare la c.d. spettanza del bene della vita, ovvero la necessità di allegare e provare di essere titolare, in base ad una norma giuridica, del bene della vita che ha perduto e di cui attraverso la domanda giudiziale vorrebbe ottenere l’equivalente economico. Più in specie, per il Consiglio la pretesa risarcitoria relativa al danno da ritardo deve essere ricondotta allo schema generale dell’art. 2043 c.c., con conseguente applicazione rigorosa del principio dell’onere della prova in capo al danneggiato circa la sussistenza di tutti i presupposti oggettivi e soggettivi dell’illecito aquiliano, con l’avvertenza che, nell’azione di responsabilità per danni, il principio dispositivo scolpito in generale all’art. 2697, comma 1, c.c., opera con pienezza, e non è temperato dal metodo acquisitivo proprio dell’azione di annullamento. Il principio di cui all’art. 1227 comma 2 c.c., pur se non espressamente richiamato dall’art. 30 comma 3, c.p.a., per orientamento costante viene reputato dal Collegio come pacificamente applicabile nel processo amministrativo – onde l’omessa attivazione da parte dell’interessato degli strumenti di tutela previsti costituisce, nel quadro del comportamento complessivo delle parti, dato valutabile, alla stregua del canone di buona fede e del principio di solidarietà, ai fini dell’esclusione o della riduzione del danno evitabile con l’ordinaria diligenza, in una logica che vede l’omessa attivazione dei rimedi di tutela (nella specie ad esempio tramite riproposizione dei vizi erroneamente assorbiti ovvero attivazione del rimedio dell’ottemperanza) non più come preclusione di rito, ma come fatto da considerare in sede di merito ai fini del giudizio sulla sussistenza e consistenza del pregiudizio risarcibile.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 19 giugno esce la sentenza del TRGA di Trento n.141 che ritiene di poter accogliere la domanda di risarcimento del danno subito da una società in conseguenza del ritardo con il quale la locale Camera di commercio, industria, artigianato e agricoltura ha provveduto ad iscriverla nel registro delle imprese nel caso in cui, a causa di tale ritardo, alla medesima società non sia stato concesso un contributo pubblico; in tal caso, infatti, sussiste per il Tar il nesso di causalità diretta, e comunque efficiente, fra la violazione della tempistica stabilita dalla legge per la suddetta iscrizione in CCIAA ed il danno reclamato dalla impresa istante, atteso che se la ridetta domanda di iscrizione nel registro delle imprese fosse stata evasa dalla Camera di commercio nel termine di 5 giorni dalla data di presentazione, l’iscrizione sarebbe stata tempestiva, e dunque la PA incaricata di vagliare l’ammissibilità della domanda di contributo non avrebbe potuto adottare il provvedimento di diniego.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 10 ottobre esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.5834 alla cui stregua i</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">l risarcimento del danno da ritardo relativo ad un interesse legittimo pretensivo non può essere assunto avulso da una valutazione concernente la spettanza del bene della vita ed è da intendersi subordinato, tra l’altro, anche alla dimostrazione che l’aspirazione al provvedimento sia destinata ad esito favorevole e quindi alla dimostrazione della spettanza definitiva del bene della vita collegato a tale interesse; ciò in quanto – chiosa il Collegio - l’entrata in vigore dell’art. 2-</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>bis</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/n/1015"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">legge n. 241 del 1990</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non ha elevato a bene della vita, suscettibile di autonoma protezione mediante il risarcimento del danno, l’interesse procedimentale al rispetto dei termini dell’azione amministrativa in modo avulso da ogni riferimento alla spettanza dell’interesse sostanziale, al cui conseguimento il procedimento stesso è finalizzato. Per il Collegio il riconoscimento della responsabilità dell’Amministrazione per il tardivo esercizio della funzione amministrativa richiede, oltre alla constatazione della violazione dei termini del procedimento, l’accertamento che l’inosservanza delle cadenze procedimentali è imputabile a colpa o dolo dell’Amministrazione medesima, che il danno lamentato è conseguenza diretta ed immediata del ritardo dell’Amministrazione, nonché la prova del danno lamentato. Entrando </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>in medias res</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per il Collegio in caso di revoca dell’aggiudicazione da parte della stazione appaltante, va presunta la restituzione all’aggiudicatario della cauzione provvisoria (ed eventualmente anche di quella definitiva, ove versata), che deve essere richiesta e le cui pertinenti voci non possono dunque essere conteggiate in sede di risarcimento del danno, neppure a titolo di responsabilità precontrattuale: peraltro, la possibilità che all’aggiudicazione provvisoria della gara non faccia seguito quella definitiva è da assumersi evento del tutto fisiologico, che esclude qualsivoglia affidamento tutelabile; onde la revoca (come pure l’annullamento) dell’aggiudicazione provvisoria non richiede la previa comunicazione di avvio del procedimento, trattandosi di atto endoprocedimentale che si inserisce nell’ambito del procedimento di scelta del contraente come momento necessario, ma non decisivo, solamente l’aggiudicazione definitiva attribuendo in modo stabile il bene della vita ed essendo pertanto idonea ad ingenerare un affidamento in capo all’aggiudicatario, sì da imporre l’instaurazione del contraddittorio procedimentale; né l’eventuale lungo tempo trascorso tra l’aggiudicazione provvisoria e la revoca della stessa, nonché dell’intera gara, può mutare la natura giuridica di atto provvisorio, ad effetti instabili, dell’aggiudicazione, atteso che il termine di 30 giorni stabilito dall’art. 12 del </span><a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/n/1686"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">d.lgs. n. 163 del 2006</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> comporta solamente che l’aggiudicazione si consideri, nel silenzio dell’Amministrazione, approvata, ma non che essa determini l’aggiudicazione definitiva, la quale resta sempre sottoposta alla verifica del possesso dei pertinenti requisiti in capo all’aggiudicataria. Sempre per il Collegio, la responsabilità precontrattuale può coesistere con un provvedimento legittimo, ponendosi in funzione del comportamento scorretto, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>melius</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> contrario ai canoni della buona fede e correttezza; ciò tuttavia non toglie che sia onere della parte provare, anche in via presuntiva, ma sulla base di allegazioni di fatto certe e precise, il pregiudizio subito, nei limiti dell’interesse negativo, e cioè il danno-evento (la lesione della libertà di autodeterminazione negoziale) ed il danno conseguenza (le perdite economiche subite a causa delle scelte negoziali illecitamente condizionate), nonché i relativi rapporti di causalità tra tali danni e la condotta scorretta che si imputa all’Amministrazione. In questa importante sentenza il Consiglio di Stato tratta tanto della responsabilità della PA per ritardo procedimentale, quanto di quella precontrattuale, accomunandole giusta predicata appartenenza di entrambe al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>genus</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della responsabilità aquiliana, con tutto quanto ne deriva in termini di elementi costitutivi dell’illecito, di onere della prova di tali elementi, nonché delle voci di pertinente danno.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2019</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 9 maggio esce la sentenza dell’Adunanza Plenaria del Consiglio di Stato n. 7 che preliminarmente richiama le conclusioni di cui all’Adunanza Plenaria 15/2014 in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>astreinte</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">,</span><i> </i><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">definite come: “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>una misura coercitiva indiretta a carattere pecuniario, inquadrabile nell’ambito delle pene private o delle sanzioni civili indirette, che mira a vincere la resistenza del debitore, inducendolo ad adempiere all’ obbligazione sancita a suo carico dall’ordine del giudice</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” risolvendosi in un “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>meccanismo automatico di irrogazione di penalità pecuniarie in vista dell’assicurazione dei valori dell’effettività e della pienezza della tutela giurisdizionale a fronte della mancata o non esatta o non tempestiva esecuzione delle sentenze emesse nei confronti della pubblica amministrazione e, più in generale, della parte risultata soccombente all’esito del giudizio di cognizione</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">E’ evidente l’ambivalenza della ricostruzione legata alla natura necessariamente condizionale della relativa statuizione giudiziale di condanna: proiettata verso il futuro in funzione compulsoria di un adempimento della parte pubblica; ma applicabile sono una volta che l’inadempimento si sia concretizzato, così rendendo illecito il comportamento. Un precetto giudiziale che, nella sua funzione e nella sua dinamica, assomiglia molto a quelli normativi di matrice sanzionatoria ai quali pure è associabile una funzione preventiva di carattere dissuasivo ed una repressiva postuma a contenuto pecuniario.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il Collegio arriva quindi ad affermare che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">è sempre possibile in sede di c.d. “ottemperanza di chiarimenti” modificare la statuizione relativa alla penalità di mora contenuta in una precedente sentenza d’ottemperanza, ove siano comprovate sopravvenienze fattuali o giuridiche che dimostrino, in concreto, la manifesta iniquità in tutto o in parte della sua applicazione. </span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Salvo il caso delle sopravvenienze, non è in via generale possibile la revisione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ex tunc</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei criteri di determinazione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>astreinte </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">dettati in una precedente sentenza d’ottemperanza, sì da incidere sui crediti a titolo di penalità già maturati dalla parte beneficiata. Tuttavia, ove il giudice dell’ottemperanza non abbia esplicitamente fissato, a causa dell’indeterminata progressività del criterio dettato, il tetto massimo della penalità, e la vicenda successiva alla determinazione abbia fatto emergere, a causa proprio della mancanza del tetto, la manifesta iniquità, quest’ultimo può essere individuato in sede di chiarimenti, con principale riferimento, fra i parametri indicati nell’art. 614 bis c.pc., al danno da ritardo nell’esecuzione del giudicato. </span></p> <p class="western" align="center"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">* * *</span></p> <p class="western"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 9 luglio esce la sentenza della II sezione del TAR Sardegna n. 622 che, in tema di risarcimento del danno da ritardo, ricorda come, secondo i principi che regolano la distribuzione dell’onere della prova, ai fini dell’accoglimento della domanda di risarcimento del danno extracontrattuale incombe al ricorrente l’onere di dimostrare la sussistenza di tutti gli elementi tipici della fattispecie di responsabilità, ossia:</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">a) il fatto illecito costituito da una condotta antigiuridica della P.A., rappresentata dall’attività amministrativa illegittima;</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">b) l’evento dannoso, e cioè il danno ingiusto rappresentato dalla lesione della situazione sostanziale protetta di cui il privato è titolare;</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">c) il nesso di causalità tra illegittimità e danno;</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">d) l’elemento soggettivo, nel senso che l’attività illegittima deve essere imputabile all’amministrazione (all’apparato amministrativo, come viene spesso precisato) a titolo di dolo o colpa.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Accanto agli elementi descritti, la giurisprudenza richiede inoltre (sulla scia della citata pronuncia delle Sezioni Unite della Cassazione del 1999) la verifica della spettanza del bene della vita che il privato intende acquisire alla propria sfera giuridica attraverso l’esercizio del potere e l’emanazione del provvedimento amministrativo richiesto. </span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Pertanto, anche nell’ipotesi di inerzia dell’amministrazione, la risarcibilità del danno derivante dalla violazione del termine per provvedere occorre verificare la sussistenza sia dei presupposti di carattere oggettivo, sia di quelli di carattere soggettivo). Con l’ulteriore precisazione che la valutazione di questi ultimi (dolo o colpa della p.a.) non può essere fondata soltanto sul dato oggettivo del superamento del termine di conclusione del procedimento amministrativo; in ogni caso, infatti, occorre quantomeno verificare se il comportamento dell’apparato amministrativo abbia travalicato i canoni della correttezza e della buona amministrazione, ovvero sia trasmodato in negligenza, omissioni o errori interpretativi di norme, ritenuti non scusabili. Con la conseguenza che la responsabilità deve essere negata quando la violazione dei termini procedimentali sia dipesa dalla sussistenza di contrasti giurisprudenziali o dall'incertezza del quadro normativo di riferimento o dalla complessità della situazione di fatto.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Questioni intriganti</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Cosa si intende per danno “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”?</b></span></p> <ol type="a"> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">si tratta di una fattispecie detta anche danno “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da silenzio</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">si compendia, in sostanza, nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo di tipo pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> perpetrata da un’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Amministrazione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">la PA si configura dunque come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colpevole del ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’adozione di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento chiestole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che da tale ritardo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lamenta un danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il privato istante che chiede il c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fa valere dunque una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che, a seconda della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prospettiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, può identificarsi quale: d.1) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità aquiliana</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ex art.</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c.; d.2) responsabilità “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contrattuale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, o meglio da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione di obbligo precostituito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ex art.</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1218</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c.;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>possibili fattispecie di danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> isolate dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dottrina</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sono </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>3</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero: e.1) annullamento di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento sfavorevole</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardata adozione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento legittimo favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; si tratta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in realtà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non tanto di responsabilità </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sfavorevole ma illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> implica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo nell’adozione del </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">pertinente</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> provvedimento legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; e.2) danno prodotto da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento legittimo favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tardivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e che dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si è fatto attendere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, pur </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>palesandosi alfine favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato istante); qui il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimo favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> va ricondotta al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (che è appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); e.3) danno prodotto da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento legittimo sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tardivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e che dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si è fatto attendere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>palesarsi sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato istante); anche qui il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimo </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">ma</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> va ricondotta al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (che è appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, seppure sfavorevole all’istante);</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">dal punto di vista </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>processuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, si sono in passato posti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2 problemi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: f.1) a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quale giudice</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, va chiesto il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pertinente risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del danno; f.2) se la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regola della pregiudiziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> debba valere non solo per il caso in cui la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesta di risarcimento danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>subordinata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullamento dell’atto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o comunque all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accertamento della illegittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del) “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>silenzio</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è scaturito; la regola della pregiudiziale è stata tuttavia superata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dall’art.30</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del c.p.a. del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2010</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; </span></p> </li> </ol> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>In cosa consiste il danno da “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”.</b></span></p> <ol type="a"> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di questo tipo di danno è ovviamente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il ritardo della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, giusta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adozione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del pertinente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il danno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> presuppone </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il solo ritardo</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in sé</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> considerato;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">si </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prescinde</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dunque in primo luogo, ed in ottica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dalla effettiva </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato istante, potendo dunque questi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>invocare il risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anche laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale bene non gli spetti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o, detto altrimenti, anche laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il proprio interesse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alfine assunto dalla PA legittimamente incompatibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">si </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prescinde</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> poi, sul crinale formale, dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>stessa effettiva adozione del provvedimento finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>relativo contenuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>può invocare il risarcimento del danno anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non adotti mai il provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad essa dalla legge demandato, ed anche laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lo adotti con un contenuto non perfettamente conforme</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pretesa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, a valle di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione della compatibilità del proprio interesse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quello pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">in passato, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prima dell’introduzione dell’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (giusta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legislativo 69.09</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), si sono registrate in dottrina </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>posizioni di approfondimento progressivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde: e.1) dapprima il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo fatto del ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>genericamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inteso, fonda la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lasciando da parte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> qualsivoglia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indagine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spettanza in capo al privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>utilità finale anelata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; e.2) dipoi, più </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>specificamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il fatto che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regola violata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla PA abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non esclude il fatto che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>essa stessa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (la regola procedimentale) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sottenda un bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (autonomamente) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riconoscibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in capo al privato istante, e dunque un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse dalla medesima protetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sicché occorre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non confondere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regola violata </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex parte publica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con gli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi che tale regola</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (procedimentale) presidia; nelle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>gare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concorsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e più in generale in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la disciplina del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pertinente termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è orientata a fornire una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>certezza temporale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato istante, il che caratterizza </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni aspetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>partecipazione al procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, giacché egli per parteciparvi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vi impegna risorse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rinuncia ad altre opportunità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (massime se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>imprenditore commerciale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) e talvolta si avvale di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>circostanze favorevoli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, durante la partecipazione, che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non possono assumersi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avere una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>durata indefinita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, affiorando dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diversi interessi sostanziali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diversi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da quello sotteso al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>principale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del singolo procedimento considerato – che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meritano anch’essi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (giusta ritardo imputabile alla PA) una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in questa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più profonda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> prospettiva, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni violazione di obbligo procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – ivi compreso quello di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rispettare il termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fissato per il singolo procedimento – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>può implicare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e normalmente implica) la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi sostanziali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>altri</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diversi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da quello che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha a diretto oggetto il bene della vita “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>proprio</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del singolo procedimento, e ciò in quanto si realizza tra PA e privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un contatto qualificato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> capace di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>svincolare la tutela risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio sulla spettanza del bene della vita “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>finale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o comunque sulle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>chance</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di conseguire tale bene) secondo un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meccanismo analogo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a quello che nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto civile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fonda i c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>obblighi di protezione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>senza prestazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), con conseguente riconduzione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla tipologia “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contrattuale da contatto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” piuttosto che a quella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aquiliana</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dopo l’introduzione dell’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (giusta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legislativo 69.09</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), si sono registrate </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in dottrina</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sostanzialmente due posizioni: f.1) una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prima prospettiva ermeneutica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> muove dalla circostanza onde la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibilità del danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è stata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riconosciuta dal legislatore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in modo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esplicito e senza condizioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.7</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del decreto legislativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>69.09</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che inserisce nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90 l’art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, reca la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>significativa rubrica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>certezza</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> nei </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>tempi di conclusione</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> del procedimento</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, e dunque sembra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>innovare il sistema</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: più in specie, il legislatore </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pone a base del potenziale danno</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo il ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>senza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il relativo risarcimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sia condizionato alla spettanza effettiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’istante anela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, spettanza </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>che il GA non è dunque tenuto ad accertare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di verificare la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura dannosa del ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> medesimo; ciò implica che può ormai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>produrre danno anche solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero ritardo della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’adozione del provvedimento, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quand’anche negativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”; secondo questa opzione ermeneutica peraltro la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della PA per il ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’adozione del provvedimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha natura “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contrattuale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, campeggiando nella pertinente fattispecie un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autonomo diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tempestiva conclusione del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, circostanza capace di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giustificare l’attribuzione al GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, stante appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’intreccio tra diritti soggettivi e interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che connota </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la materia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo provvedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e gli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eventuali danni che vi si ricollegano</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) affidata appunto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in altri termini, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legislatore del 2009</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ha inteso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>significativamente innovare il sistema</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> connotando il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fattore “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>tempo procedimentale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autonomo interesse protetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in guisa di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendosi allora assumere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibile anche il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da c.d. “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, e dunque anche il danno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scaturigine del ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nell’adozione da parte della PA di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento negativo legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; f.2) una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>seconda prospettiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla cui stregua </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nulla è mutato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non risarcibilità del danno c.d. da mero ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, conformemente all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indirizzo tradizionale</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contrario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appunto ad assumere tale risarcibilità; ciò tenendo conto del fatto – sul crinale dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interpretazione c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>storica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.2.bis</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non ha riproposto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la previsione di cui al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disegno di legge Nicolais</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (Atto Senato 1859) che, nel prevedere una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>norma di tenore analogo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a quello del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>neo introdotto art.2.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della legge 241.90, assumeva nondimeno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esplicitamente risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>indipendentemente</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> dalla </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>spettanza</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> del </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>beneficio</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> derivante dal </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>provvedimento richiesto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, con inciso che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non essendo stato riproposto </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>expressis verbis</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in tali termini dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>novella del 2009</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (ancorché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’originario disegno di legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - Atto Camera 1441 - riproponesse </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quel medesimo testo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>modificato nella versione alfine approvata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), viene interpretato da questa opzione ermeneutica quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>freccia nell’arco della tesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> onde l’art.2.bis </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non prevede</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appunto la ristorabilità del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, rivelandosi peraltro “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>neutra</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” la previsione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, tesa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esclusivamente a confermare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appunto la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione di tale giudice</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al cospetto di fattispecie di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spendita in ogni caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> </ol> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Cosa distingue il danno da ritardo dal danno c.d. “da disturbo”?</b></span></p> <ol type="a"> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">entrambi hanno a presupposto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una inerzia della PA</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fuori asse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quadro ordinamentale vigente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il danno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si risolve nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato, che a causa dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inerzia pubblica</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non si vede erogato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento ampliativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della propria </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sfera giuridica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel termine divisato per la conclusione del procedimento; il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non ottiene nei termini</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quello che dovrebbe (o vorrebbe) ottenere;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il danno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da disturbo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si risolve nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse oppositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato, che a causa dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inerzia pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> vede </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procrastinarsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>normale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tollerabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> gli effetti di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conculca le proprie facoltà di godimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprietario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>determinato bene</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha già</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può pienamente godere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di quello che ha.</span></p> </li> </ol> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Cosa distingue – in tema di ritardo – l’indennizzo dal risarcimento del danno?</b></span></p> <ol type="a"> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (previsto, a partire dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2013</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2.bis, comma 1.bis</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della legge </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in combinato disposto con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.28</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legge n.69.13</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, peraltro </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>limitatamente ad alcuni settori procedimentali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e segnatamente in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avvio ed esercizio di attività di impresa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) fa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da contraltare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto lecito dannoso della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed è connesso alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mera scadenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ristorando dunque il “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, in modo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutt’affatto sganciato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in capo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato istante </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(e dunque dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>compatibilità o meno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quello pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), senza per giunta che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>campeggino peculiari oneri di allegazione e prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> né sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>crinale oggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> né su quello </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dolo o colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA);</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (previsto dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2.bis, comma 1</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della legge </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a partire dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2009</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in modo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>generalizzato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e dunque in relazione ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni procedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) si </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giustappone</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illecito della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, consistente nel fatto che - pur </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spettando al privato istante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è acclarato alfine </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>compatibile con l’interesse pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anelato bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – tale bene </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>gli viene erogato in ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concluso in ritardo il pertinente procedimento</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ex parte publica</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che ne consegue </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>va allegato e provato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia in termini di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizio emergente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lucro cessante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, così come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>va provato il dolo o quanto meno la colpa della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sul versante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eventualmente già ottenuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a titolo di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mero ritardo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” va poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scomputato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ammontare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> riconosciuto a titolo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> </li> </ol>
