<p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, 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, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>L’interesse legittimo - come il diritto soggettivo (ed ammesso che se ne differenzi realmente) – proprio in quanto “</i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">interesse</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>” giuridicamente protetto, è collegato ad un bene della vita del relativo portatore, che pretende di conservarlo (interesse oppositivo) o di ottenerlo (interesse pretensivo) dall’Amministrazione con la quale interagisce; il comportamento illecito della PA (normalmente riassunto in un atto illegittimo) sottrae il bene al privato che voleva conservarlo, o non eroga il bene al privato che voleva ottenerlo. Se tuttavia nel caso dell’interesse oppositivo la tutela in forma specifica, giusta annullamento dell’atto illegittimo, circoscrive le conseguenze dannose a quelle prodottesi nel periodo in cui il bene è stato </i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">contra ius</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i> (in forza di un inadempimento pubblico all’obbligo di </i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">non facere</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>) sottratto al privato; nel caso dell’interesse pretensivo, la tutela in forma specifica del privato, connessa all’annullamento dell’atto illegittimo (negativo, quand’anche riconducibile ad una mera inerzia pubblica), implica un danno potenzialmente assai maggiore perché avvinto al mancato ottenimento da parte del privato del bene anelato (ancora una volta, a causa di un inadempimento pubblico, ma stavolta ad obblighi di fare o di dare); un “</i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">non-ottenimento</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>” che può atteggiarsi a meramente temporaneo, ovvero a definitivo, con conseguente maggiore significatività in questa seconda ipotesi della tutela risarcitoria “</i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">per equivalente</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>” la cui importanza, come è evidente, cresce vieppiù laddove la tutela in forma specifica si riveli nella specie inappagante. Non è un caso allora se la tutela risarcitoria “</i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">per equivalente</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>” è stata sdoganata proprio quando l’interesse pretensivo (e la correlata pretesa inadempiuta ad un </i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">dare</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i> o ad un </i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">facere</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i> pubblico) si è imposto su quello oppositivo (e sulla correlata pretesa inadempiuta ad un </i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">non facere</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i> pubblico), contemporaneamente alla progressiva trasformazione dello Stato da liberale a sociale (o del </i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">welfare</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>). Su questo orizzonte di genere si innestano poi, più in specie, le problematiche concernenti i rapporti tra Giudice ed Amministrazione, dovendo solo quest’ultima – seppure teoricamente e sempre entro determinati limiti disegnati dal principio di legalità – verificare attraverso il potere se la pretesa del privato sia o meno (soddisfacibile perché) compatibile con l’interesse pubblico, e potendo allora il giudice solo “</i></span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">pronosticare</span></span><span style="font-family: Baskerville Old Face, Baskerville Old Face, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>” se, in caso di attività legittima, la PA avrebbe o meno lasciato o dato al privato il bene, rispettivamente, sottratto od anelato, sulla scorta della concreta consistenza del potere (vincolato o discrezionale) dalla legge riconosciuto all’Amministrazione con riguardo al singolo rapporto amministrativo.</i></span></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Crono-articolo</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1865</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 20 marzo viene varata la legge </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>n.2248, allegato E</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>abolitrice del contenzioso amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che agli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articoli 4 e 5</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> prevede la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>possibilità per il GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’unico giudice</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previsto dal sistema – di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disapplicare il provvedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcire il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendosi poi la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adeguare</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullando </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">per conseguenza</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> l’atto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> assunto illecito/illegittimo in sede di autotutela.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1942</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>codice civile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>civile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, conosce tradizionalmente le ipotesi di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità connessa ad una obbligazione precostituita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (c.d., ma in modo improprio, “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contrattuale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”) ex </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.1218 e seguenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; le ipotesi di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità aquiliana</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, collocantesi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>del tutto al di fuori da qualunque rapporto precostituito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra le parti, massime se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>cristallizzato</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in un contratto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>extracontrattuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) ex </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2043 e seguenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; le ipotesi, per chi le considererà </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ulteriormente autonome</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nelle quali </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un contratto non vi è</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si tratta per giungervi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vi si giunge ma si stipula un contratto invalido</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>precontrattuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) ex </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.1337 e 1338</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1948</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 01 gennaio entra in vigore la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Costituzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> repubblicana, che prevede una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>norma esplicitamente dedicata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità dei pubblici dipendenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: si tratta dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.28</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde i </span><a href="http://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/122.html"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>funzionari</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dipendenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dello </span><a href="http://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/123.html"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Stato</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>altri <a href="http://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/123.html">enti pubblici</a></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sono </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>direttamente <a href="http://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/124.html">responsabili</a></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, secondo le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>leggi <a href="http://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/124.html">penali, civili e amministrative</a></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> compiuti in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione di <a href="http://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/107.html">diritti</a></b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con la precisazione che in tali casi – di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diretta responsabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei funzionari e dei dipendenti pubblici - la </span><a href="http://www.brocardi.it/dizionario/124.html"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità civile</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e no</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>n anche</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>penale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>si estende</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” allo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Stato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e agli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>enti pubblici medesimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. L’art.28 è peraltro collocato nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Parte prima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della Costituzione, dedicata ai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritti e doveri dei cittadini</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chiudendone</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Titolo I</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dedicato ai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rapporti civili</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; essa è funzionale a costituire un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>baluardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presidio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>libertà civili</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previste negli articoli precedenti, e dunque per i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritti fondamentali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei cittadini; da ciò la conseguenza onde la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità civile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>enti pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è prevista esclusivamente laddove si verifichi una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di diritti soggettivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (massime se “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>assoluti</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, come è tipico appunto dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritti fondamentali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (salvo a voler considerare il riferimento ai “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>diritti</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” contenuto nell’art.28 come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>estensibile anche agli interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quali </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>particolari “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>diritti</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ovvero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazioni giuridiche soggettive</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">). Inoltre, la Carta parla di “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>leggi civili</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” e di “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>responsabilità civile</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” della PA e dei relativi agenti, lasciando sullo sfondo la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della ridetta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che potrebbe qualificarsi come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aquiliana</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contrattuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di altra natura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>precontrattuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>tertium genus</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e così via). Dal punto di vista </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, è anche aperta la questione se quella dell’Ente si atteggia a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità oggettiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero debba </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>necessariamente </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">essere</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> presidiata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>componente (almeno) colposa </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">tanto del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggetto agente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quanto dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>apparato cui appartiene</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; se si tratta di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità parallela e sussidiaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (come parrebbe evincersi dalla dicitura “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>si estende</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”) rispetto a quella dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>funzionari</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dipendenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (responsabili </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in prima battuta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), ovvero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>asimmetrica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (non necessariamente parallela) e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solidale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Dal punto di vista processuale, importante anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.111, ultimo comma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, della Carta laddove si prevede che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contro le decisioni del Consiglio di Stato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (oltre che della Corte dei conti) il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ricorso in Cassazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è ammesso per i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soli motivi inerenti alla giurisdizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: questo significa che per le questioni </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitorie</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da fatto illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (teoricamente) rimesse al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Consiglio di Stato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e per quelle che in seguito saranno rimesse ai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Tar in primo grado</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) – a differenza di quanto accade per quelle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>civilistiche “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>pure</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rimesse al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Giudice ordinario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non esiste</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>terzo grado di giudizio di legittimità nomofilattico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della Cassazione, ma solo un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eventuale giudizio </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(delle SSUU)</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> sulla giurisdizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1980</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 25 marzo esce la sentenza della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Corte costituzionale n.35</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che dichiara la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inammissibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della questione di legittimità costituzionale dell'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 31</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge urbanistica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> 17 agosto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1942, n. 1150</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sollevata in riferimento agli artt. 42, 24 e 113 della Costituzione, laddove tale norma, secondo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l'interpretazione dominante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non consente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l'esercizio dell'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azione di risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nei confronti della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimamente negato, sospeso o revocato una licenza edilizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quando attraverso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atti positivi o negativi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si sia con ciò attuata una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>compressione del diritto di proprietà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>terreno da edificare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, tale da produrre uno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>svuotamento di rilevante entità</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ed incisività</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del suo contenuto. Secondo le significative parole della Corte, che manifesta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perplessità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdurante non risarcibilità del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inferto ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sono ben comprensibili le considerazioni che hanno condotto il giudice remittente - di fronte al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>deplorevole comportamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tenuto da una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>amministrazione comunale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, responsabile di una serie di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atti illegittimi reiterati</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in spregio alle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decisioni del giudice amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>grave pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> d'un privato proprietario - a sollevare l'arduo problema, tanto discusso in dottrina come nella giurisprudenza, della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità civile delle pubbliche amministrazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivati ai soggetti privati dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adozione di atti o provvedimenti amministrativi illegittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di situazioni di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Problema – segnala la Corte - di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indubbia gravità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>particolare attualità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in relazione alle restrizioni connesse alla moderna disciplina urbanistico-edilizia, che, anche a giudizio della Corte medesima, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si impone ormai all'attenzione del legislatore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e che tuttavia di configura quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>problema complesso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, richiedente come tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prudenti soluzioni normative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non solo nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disciplina sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ma anche nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regolamento delle competenze giurisdizionali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: un problema di ordine generale, che non può essere risolto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dalla Corte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio sulla legittimità costituzionale dell'art. 31 della legge urbanistica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in relazione alla ipotesi di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo diniego di licenza edilizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1985</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 23 novembre esce la sentenza delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>SSUU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della Cassazione n. 5813 che, inserendosi in un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solco giurisprudenziale granitico e pietrificato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, assume che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il danno è “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai sensi dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c. solo quando </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lede un diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, compendiandosi ad un tempo in un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>non iure</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e in un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per l’appunto, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contra ius</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: si tratta della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>c.d. concezione soggettiva dell’illecito aquiliano</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde esso è tale solo se – oltre a compendiarsi in un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comportamento fuori asse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sistema ordinamentale vigente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>non iure</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) – implica la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione giuridica soggettiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contra ius</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) riconosciuta e garantita dal sistema nella forma del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo perfetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esclusione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dunque dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1988</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 21 gennaio esce la sentenza delle SSUU n. 436 che ribadisce l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>orientamento consolidato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> onde </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è risarcibile il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inferto ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, come accade nel caso dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo diniego di concessione edilizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, essendosi al cospetto per l’appunto della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di un interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e non già di un diritto soggettivo.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1989</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 21 dicembre viene varata la Direttiva del Consiglio n.89/665/CEE, c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Direttiva-ricorsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che coordina le disposizioni legislative, regolamentari e amministrative relative all'applicazione delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedure di ricorso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in materia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aggiudicazione degli appalti pubblici di forniture e di lavori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e che prevede in caso di violazioni l’obbligo per gli Stati di introdurre anche la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per i soggetti lesi.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1992</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 19 febbraio viene varata la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n. 142</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di recepimento della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>c.d. Direttiva Ricorsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1989</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla cui stregua (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.13</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>settore peculiare degli appalti pubblici di lavori o di forniture</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove la PA compia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atti in violazione del diritto comunitario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>relative norme interne di recepimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – ancorché ad essere lesi siano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non già diritti soggettivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (tipica l’ipotesi della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>partecipazione alle gare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) – va </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>garantito in ogni caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato che si assuma leso da tali violazioni il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Si tratta di una disposizione che si applica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non a tutti gli appalti di lavori e di forniture</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a quelli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sopra-soglia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, coinvolti come tali dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>applicazione delle norme comunitarie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; inoltre, occorre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sempre preventivamente chiedere ed ottenere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullamento dell’atto illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> innanzi al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>poi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> procedere ad invocare la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> innanzi al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GO </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudiziale amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 18 novembre esce la sentenza delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>SSUU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> n.12316 che, con riferimento a quei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>particolari interessi legittimi oppositivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che si compendiano in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritti soggettivi “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>affievoliti</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, rappresenta come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ne sia predicabile il risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>del GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in caso di lesione, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>previo annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento che li affievolisce</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e conseguente “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>riespansione</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” dei medesimi. La pronuncia si inserisce in quel filone di sentenze che, pur </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non predicando espressamente ed in via generale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la risarcibilità della lesione inferta ad interessi legittimi (anche per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>motivi di cassa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: significherebbe esporre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bilancio pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>notevole esborso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, collegato alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>monetizzazione risarcitoria degli errori pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), ne avverte la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostanziale inadeguatezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal punto di vista della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela del privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, tentando di porvi in qualche modo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riparo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 19 dicembre viene varata la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n.489</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in materia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>appalti nei c.d. settori esclusi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.11</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> prevede – come già accaduto per gli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>appalti di lavori e di forniture</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n.142</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> eventualmente inferti ai privati dall’Amministrazione aggiudicatrice in conseguenza della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione del diritto comunitario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pertinenti norme di recepimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1993</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 5 marzo esce la sentenza delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>SSUU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> n.2667 che, in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato rilascio della concessione edilizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dopo aver affermato come il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non abbia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – neppure di fronte a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>strumenti urbanistici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che prevedono una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>determinata edificabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del relativo suolo – un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo al detto rilascio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, potendo comunqe la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalmente determinare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concrete modalità di esercizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di tale “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>diritto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” (che è dunque, secondo la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dizione dottrinale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> atteggiantesi a “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>diritto in attesa di espansione</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”), ribadisce poi come debba </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>escludersi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che di fronte ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>posizione soggettiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> qualificabile come di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>obbligo di risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, stante come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c. colleghi quest’ultimo non già </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ad una mera condotta </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contra ius</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto piuttosto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contemporanea presenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>posizione di diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perfetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), a nulla rilevando in senso opposto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’espressa previsione normativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> contenuta nell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.13</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della legge </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>142.92</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed afferente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in via speciale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sola materia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>appalti pubblici di lavori e forniture</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1995</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">L’11 febbraio esce la sentenza della I sezione della Cassazione n.1540 che – pur ribadendo in linea generale la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non risarcibilità dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inferti ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, massime se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pretensivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – afferma tuttavia configurarsi una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eccezione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con annessa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabilità di un danno risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comportamento illegittimo della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si sia tradotto, sul crinale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>penale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>reato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e ciò atteso come in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> prodotta da un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fatto di reato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ingiustizia del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si configura </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, senza necessità che si provi la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di un diritto soggettivo perfetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 17 marzo viene varato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legislativo n.157 </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">in materia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>appalti di servizi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.30 </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">prevede – come già accaduto per gli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>appalti di lavori e di forniture</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n.142.92</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per gli appalti nei settori esclusi con la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n.489.92</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> eventualmente inferti ai privati dall’Amministrazione aggiudicatrice in conseguenza della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione del diritto comunitario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pertinenti norme di recepimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 3 maggio esce la sentenza della I sezione della Cassazione n.4083 che – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesioni inferte ad interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – avverte, pur confermandolo, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’inadeguatezza ormai</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indirizzo interpretativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove appunto viene assunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non tale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) quello che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>coinvolge interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e non diritti soggettivi perfetti.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1997</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 19 marzo esce la sentenza delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>SSUU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> n.2436 che si occupa di un ipotesi di “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>diritto fievole </b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ab origine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” o “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in attesa di espansione</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” che sia stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>espanso dapprima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> giusta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ampliativo della sfera giuridica del privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per poi essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovamente compresso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> attraverso un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento di secondo grado</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autotutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Secondo la Corte, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>innovativamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, beneficia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>della c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>riespansione</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non già solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la situazione giuridica soggettiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ab origine</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma anche quella che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ab origine</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> di interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e che – dopo essere stata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>espansa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - viene poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovamente compressa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento in sede di autotutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che venga poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullato perché illegittimo dal GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>originaria posizione di vantaggio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ottenuta dalla PA e poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dalla medesima conculcata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento in sede di autotutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> giudicato illegittimo produce, per la Corte, un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> connesso alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riespansione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’annullamento dell’atto di autotutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto risarcitorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da far valere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dinanzi al GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 23 ottobre esce la sentenza delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>SSUU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della Cassazione n.10453 onde, consolidando un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>orientamento pretorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che ha preso le mosse nei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>primi anni Novanta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove il privato invochi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> innanzi al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per lagnata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, assume </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non doversi dichiarare il difetto di giurisdizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rigetto della domanda</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nel merito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Si tratta di una opzione che muove dall’innovativa convinzione onde </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>correttamente il privato chiede al GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che egli giudica infertigli dalla PA, dal momento che le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azioni risarcitorie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (a differenza di quelle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) spettano per l’appunto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>competenza giurisdizionale del GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto meno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in linea di principio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendosi tenere conto del fatto che allorché il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>agisce per il risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, egli fa valere proprio il “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>diritto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione per l’appunto del GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. E’ quest’ultimo, concretamente chiamato a decidere su tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo risarcitorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, a valutare per la Corte </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>se esso si configuri in concreto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, indagando in particolare la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tipologia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione giuridica soggettiva lesa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trattenere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la giurisdizione ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accogliere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la domanda laddove sia stato leso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (con acclarata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurabilità in concreto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), ovvero per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trattenere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la giurisdizione ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>respingere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la domanda laddove sia stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>leso un interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (con acclarata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non configurabilità in concreto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), stante la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura non “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusta</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ex </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c., in quest’ultimo caso, del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizio subito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Solo laddove si invochi il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> innanzi al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in luogo che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dinanzi al GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per lesione (sempre e comunque) di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o viceversa, davanti al GO piuttosto che davanti al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) può profilarsi per la Corte una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>questione di giurisdizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non già di merito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Quando invece, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fuori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’ambito di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>possibile operatività</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, si discuta – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tra due privati</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tra privato e PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che eserciti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>poteri autoritativi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – se esista o meno un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e si scopra a valle del processo che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale diritto non è configurabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non essere “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> subito da chi agisce in giudizio (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> essendone stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vulnerato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, a propria volta, un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), la questione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è di giurisdizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di merito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo il GO </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>respingere la domanda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’attore per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insussistenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’appunto dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>invocato diritto al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1998</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 31 marzo viene varato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legislativo n.80</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che attribuendo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ex novo</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedure per l’aggiudicazione degli appalti pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva al GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, prevede che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche il risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale materia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> spetti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>al GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, contestualmente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>abrogando le “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>speciali</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” disposizioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previste dagli articoli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>13 della legge 142.92</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (appalti di lavori e forniture), </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>11 della legge 489.92</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (appalti nei settori esclusi) e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>30 del decreto legislativo 157.95</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (appalti di servizi). Più in specie, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> viene </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ridisegnata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>blocchi di materie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, annoverando tra esse </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’urbanistica e l’edilizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>servizi pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedure di aggiudicazione degli appalti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed altre ancora, mentre contestualmente viene </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spostata la giurisdizione sul pubblico impiego c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>privatizzato</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” al GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Nelle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>materie di “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>nuova</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del GA, elencate negli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articoli 33 e 34</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del decreto, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.35</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> prevede peraltro la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>devoluzione al GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> medesimo del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere di conoscere le questioni risarcitorie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, dunque, di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcire il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inferto a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritti soggettivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">L’8 maggio esce l’ordinanza della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Corte costituzionale n.165</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che dichiara la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>manifesta inammissibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>questione di legittimità costituzionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del codice civile, sollevata, in riferimento agli artt. 3, 24 e 113 della Costituzione, dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Tribunale di Isernia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove tale norma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non prevede la risarcibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione inferta ad interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. La Corte preliminarmente richiama quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>già affermato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con la </span><a href="http://www.giurcost.org/decisioni/1980/0085o-80.html"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sentenza n. 85 del 1980</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine al problema della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità civile delle pubbliche amministrazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivanti ai soggetti privati dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adozione di atti e provvedimenti amministrativi illegittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di situazioni di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quale problema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indubbia gravità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>particolare attualità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> — anche nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>settore urbanistico-edilizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> — che si é iniziato ad imporre alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta attenzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non solo del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legislatore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma anche della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione ordinaria di legittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove essa ha avvertito "</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>l’inadeguatezza dell’indirizzo interpretativo sul danno ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">" (viene richiamata la sentenza della I sezione della Cassazione n. 4083.96). La Corte in proposito ribadisce come tale "</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>problema di ordine generale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">" richieda </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prudenti soluzioni normative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non solo nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disciplina sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ma anche nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regolamento delle competenze giurisdizionali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e nelle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scelte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>misure risarcitorie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennitarie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>reintegrative in forma specifica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripristinatorie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed infine nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>delimitazione delle utilità economiche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> suscettibili di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ristoro patrimoniale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nei confronti della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. La Corte registra poi come il legislatore nazionale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non sia </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>medio tempore</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> rimasto inerte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, avendo adottato tutta una serie di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interventi settoriali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e citando in proposito, in materia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione del diritto comunitario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>appalti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la legge 19 febbraio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1992, n. 142, art. 13</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; per l’estensione ai settori esclusi la legge 19 dicembre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1992, n. 489, art. 11, comma 1</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; per gli appalti di servizi la legge 22 febbraio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1994, n. 146, art. 11, lettera i)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e il decreto legislativo 17 marzo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1995, n. 157, art. 30</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; per gli appalti di opere pubbliche in genere, la legge 11 febbraio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1994, n. 109, art. 32</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> peraltro successivamente modificata dal d.l. 3 aprile </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1995, n. 101</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> convertito nella legge 2 giugno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1995, n. 216</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>senza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tuttavia ulteriore previsione espressa in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; per la responsabilità in materia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo temporale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilascio di concessione edilizia,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il decreto legge 5 ottobre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1993, n. 398, art. 4</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, convertito in legge 4 dicembre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1993, n. 493</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; il decreto legge 26 gennaio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1995, n. 24</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non convertito in legge ma i cui effetti sono stati fatti salvi dalla legge 23 dicembre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1996, n. 662, art. 2</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento su istanza di parte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la previsione di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indennizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato rispetto del termine del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>obblighi e prestazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a carico dell’amministrazione attraverso una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>delegificazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rinvio a regolamenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, di cui alla legge 15 marzo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1997, n. 59, art. 20, comma 4, lettera h)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; e, in attuazione della delega legislativa contenuta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nell’art. 11, comma 4, lettera g)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della citata legge n. 59 del 1997 (prorogata con legge 15 maggio 1997, n. 127, art. 7, comma 1, lettera f)), l’estensione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alle controversie, in materia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>edilizia, urbanistica e di servizi pubblici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, aventi ad oggetto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritti patrimoniali conseguenziali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ivi comprese quelle relative al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, d.lgs. 31 marzo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1998, n. 80, artt. 33, 34 e 35</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nonché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 45, comma 18</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che mantiene ferma la giurisdizione prevista dalle norme in vigore per i giudizi pendenti al 30 giugno 1998. Per la Corte tuttavia la questione, per come prospettata dal giudice rimettente, é nel caso di specie </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>manifestamente inammissibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per non essersi verificato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposto in ogni caso necessario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla configurazione di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità dell’amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in conseguenza di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, vale a dire </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’accertamento della illegittimità dell’atto o del comportamento dell’amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che la medesima ordinanza sottolinea essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ancora all’esame del giudice amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di primo grado in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ricorso per l’annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: la Corte rammenta in proposito che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>previa definizione della controversia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’atto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di diniego della concessione edilizia (attività provvedimentale devoluta alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva del giudice amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) costituisce — in mancanza di diversa regolamentazione del legislatore, anche se é stata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>auspicata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>unificazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per evitare una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>duplicità di giudizi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con competenza bipartita — un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indispensabile antecedente logico giuridico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (v. per riferimento art. 13 della legge n. 142 del 1992) dal quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dipende la decisione della causa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. La conclusione che la Corte ne ritrae è che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilevanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della questione é nel caso di specie </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meramente ipotetica e non attuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, essendo prematuro il dubbio di legittimità costituzionale: per applicare l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 295 del c.p.c. sulla sospensione del processo civile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> — come prospetta il giudice </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>a quo</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> — in attesa della risoluzione della controversia amministrativa, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> deve infatti per la Corte essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>necessariamente affrontato e risolto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in via preliminare il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dubbio sulla legittimità costituzionale dell’art. 2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del cod. civ. (anche perchè — secondo la valutazione dello stesso giudice rimettente — si configuravano nel contempo "</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>posizioni di </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>diritti soggettivi</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i> coesistenti con </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>interessi legittimi</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">"). Si tratta di una importante pronuncia che auspica allora un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>definitivo (e generale) intervento del legislatore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulla questione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibilità delle lesioni inferte ad interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dichiarando tuttavia nel caso di specie </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inammissibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la questione di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimità costituzionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’art.2043 c.c.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1999</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 22 luglio esce la storica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sentenza delle SSUU n.500</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che si esprime in termini di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità aquiliana</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’Amministrazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ex art.2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c. La Corte parte dal fatto che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai sensi della ridetta norma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non già solo il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivante dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di un diritto assoluto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di un diritto di credito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma anche il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno inferto all’interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, da intendersi come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione giuridica sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> collegata ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del relativo portatore, che è ad esso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sotteso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Nel momento in cui l’azione pubblica ha </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vulnerato l’interesse al bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che è appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sotteso all’interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, da assumersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meritevole di protezione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla stregua dell’ordinamento giuridico, si assiste ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione dell’art.2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c. In sostanza, quando viene </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>leso un interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte dell’Amministrazione attraverso un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ciò appare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>necessario ma non ancora sufficiente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per accedere alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela risarcitoria aquiliana</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: occorre anche che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’attività illegittima e colpevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’Amministrazione abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>leso l’interesse al bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che si collega a quell’interesse legittimo, e che è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse meritevole di tutela per l’ordinamento giuridico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> capace di rendere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per l’appunto, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>“</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” ex art.2043 c</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.c. Per potersi predicare il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno (aquiliano)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inferto all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (in presenza di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un atto illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) occorre in primo luogo che si sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risolto in senso positivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio di spettanza in capo al medesimo del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sotteso al vantato interesse legittimo, massime in fattispecie di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse c.d. pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con connessa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>necessità di un giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>raggiungimento del bene della vita anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si fosse comportata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in modo legittimo; occorre in secondo luogo che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’azione o l’omissione della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si sia risolta, giusta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nesso di causalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>vulnus</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ridetta situazione giuridica protetta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> vantata dal privato; occorre infine, sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>crinale soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prova della colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>apparato</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” dell’Amministrazione, secondo appunto il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>parametro di cui all’art.2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c., il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>onere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> grava ancora una volta sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato attore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. E’ importante l’affermazione della Corte onde </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’art.2043 non costituisce una “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>norma secondaria</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (capace di operare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quando sia individuato un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>determinato diritto soggettivo leso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), atteggiandosi piuttosto a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>clausola generale “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>primaria</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla cui stregua </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni qualvolta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> venga cagionato un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si configura un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, palesandosi “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, per l’appunto, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni danno derivante da un fatto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>leda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse giuridicamente rilevante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quantunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non si atteggi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo perfetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Naturalmente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è sufficiente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per ottenere il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il fatto illecito </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sia ingiusto perché lesivo di un interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (come tale giuridicamente rilevante), occorrendo anche la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutti gli altri elementi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concorrono</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’appunto a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>configurare il fatto illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sia dal punto di vista </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>oggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (danno, nesso di causalità), sia sul crinale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (colpa, da intendersi come “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>colpa apparato</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”). Per quanto più in specie concerne la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione degli interessi oppositivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per la Corte è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quello che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sacrifica l’interesse alla conservazione del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione di vantaggio</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esercizio del potere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: si tratta – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esplicitamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e peraltro secondo quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>già riconosciuto in passato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) – delle ipotesi di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che sia stato “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>affievolito</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento amministrativo illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; ma si tratta anche – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>implicitamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>innovativamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – delle ipotesi in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>a fronte di un provvedimento (illegittimo) ampliativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sfera giuridica del destinatario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, si ponga il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita conculcato di un terzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che da quel provvedimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>abbia subito un </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>vulnus</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, come nel caso del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vicino</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>confinante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si opponga al permesso di costruire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che la PA rilasci al proprietario limitrofo. Per la Corte peraltro, ferma la necessità di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provare la colpa dell’Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può assumersi </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in forza della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>acclarata illegittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’atto amministrativo – può invece </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assumersi </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> l’ingiustizia del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ad essere conculcato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’Amministrazione sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>per l’appunto un interesse legittimo oppositivo </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(o</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>statico</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), giacché in tal caso il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita precede</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’azione pubblica illegittima che, una volta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accertata tale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), non può </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non aver comportato in via immediata e diretta un </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>vulnus</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al ridetto, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>preesistente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> bene della vita, non occorrendo (a differenza di quanto invece accade </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>per gli interessi c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>dinamici</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” o “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>pretensivi</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alcun giudizio prognostico di spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con riguardo ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un bene che è già nel patrimonio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del soggetto privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>allorché la PA provvede</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Diversamente si pone la questione al cospetto della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi pretensivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: mentre quando il privato è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse oppositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> egli si palesa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>già direttamente collegato al bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che tende a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conservare e mantenere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nel caso dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il bene della vita </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è solo anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal privato medesimo e passa da una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione di compatibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’interesse pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> affidata al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Ciò implica – per le SSUU – come in questo caso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non sia sufficiente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per parlare di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e di connesso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) acclarare la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità dell’azione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la quale si sostanzia nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non provvedere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedere in ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>istanza del privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, occorrendo piuttosto un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il giudice (il GO) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>deve operare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tenendo come punto di riferimento la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>normativa pubblica di settore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: tale giudizio prognostico ha ad oggetto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la fondatezza o meno dell’istanza del privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di stabilire se, presentando tale istanza, il privato si sia palesato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non già di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mera aspettativa come tale non meritevole di tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto piuttosto di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diversa e più consistente situazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> suscettibile di determinare in capo a lui un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>oggettivo affidamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>positiva conclusione della vicenda amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che – stando alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disciplina amministrativa applicabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e valutando la fattispecie </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>secondo un criterio di normalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – poteva dirsi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>destinata ad un esito favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con connessa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>erogazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, da parte della PA, del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in ultima analisi, e proprio per questo motivo, di una situazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggettiva giuridicamente tutelabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Il giudice, al fine di erogare il chiesto risarcimento, verificata la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità dell’azione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, deve allora </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>collocarsi </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex ante</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avvio del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di verificare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la c.d. spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anelato dal privato sulla scorta della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disciplina di riferimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e secondo un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>canone di normalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: solo in questo caso potrà riconoscere un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che non potrebbe invece semplicemente scaturire da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mere e generiche aspettative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato, né tampoco </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dal solo rapporto procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra privato e PA e dagli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eventuali affidamenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>correttezza dell’azione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 23 dicembre esce la sentenza della I sezione del Tar Lombardia n.5049 che, in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> connesso alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spendita di potere discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte dell’Amministrazione, accoglie la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nozione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> definita dalla dottrina </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>“</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>delimitativa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” della chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove quest’ultima è da considerarsi come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un bene già presente nel patrimonio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del danneggiato allorché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si verifica l’evento lesivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, compreso il caso dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto amministrativo illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>denega l’anelato bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; conseguentemente, va </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riconosciuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al soggetto privato danneggiato un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ancorché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ridimensionato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al cospetto di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ridotte possibilità di conseguire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in una prospettiva di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno emergente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e non già di lucro cessante) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autonomo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per l’appunto, rispetto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguimento effettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del ridetto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Nel caso di specie il Tar, in sede</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> demolitoria,</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annulla gli atti di una gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> bandita per affidare un appalto funzionale alla gestione di un servizio di pulizia; in sede </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esclude</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il ricorrente il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno in forma specifica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (per essere stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>già stipulato il contratto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il soggetto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo aggiudicatario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: in realtà si tratta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non già</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento in forma specifica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto piuttosto dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>adempimento tecnicamente inteso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pretesa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato ricorrente di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aggiudicarsi il contratto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> stipulato con terzi); </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esclude</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibilità per equivalente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> connesso alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, poiché è stata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullata l’intera gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è detto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che, in caso di relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripetizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il ricorrente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si sarebbe aggiudicato il contratto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; riconosce invece il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da perdita di chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (intesa appunto in senso “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>delimitativo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”), dal momento che – laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non fosse stato già stipulato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contratto di appalto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il soggetto risultato illegittimo aggiudicatario – si sarebbe svolta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una nuova gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avrebbe potuto partecipare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il ricorrente con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una qualche chance di vittoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, peraltro nel caso di specie </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>consistente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (l’impresa ricorrente era </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>precedente affidataria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del servizio e nella gara </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex post</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> giudicata illegittima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è giunta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>seconda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dopo l’aggiudicataria). In questo caso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> viene assunta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in via autonoma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto al (solo possibile o probabile) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguimento del bene finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>posta attiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>patrimonio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’impresa conculcata dall’azione illegittima della PA e come tale risarcibile (le concrete chance di successo nella nuova gara rilevando solo al fine di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quantificare il risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2000</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 12 gennaio esce la sentenza della VI sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.197 che si occupa di una fattispecie di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> connesso alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata vittoria di un concorso pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nel cui contesto la PA (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>commissione di concorso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) opera delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione tecniche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> notoriamente assunte </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insindacabili nel merito dal GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione di legittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> perché espressione di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalità tecnica c.d. pura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insindacabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si traduce nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impossibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di formulare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizi alternativi da parte del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, neppure a fini </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed è normalmente avallata anche da quella dottrina che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ammette più in generale un sindacato “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>forte</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del GA sulla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalità tecnica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA, stante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’elevato grado di soggettività e di irripetibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che esprime una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>commissione d’esame o di concorso pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 13 aprile esce la sentenza della II sezione del Tar Toscana n.660 che, per l’ipotesi di invocato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da mancata aggiudicazione di una gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, chiarisce come tale danno possa avere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ad oggetto anche </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">la</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> perdita della chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di aggiudicazione, quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdita della possibilità di conseguire un risultato utile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e come tale da assumersi quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione del diritto alla integrità del patrimonio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è per il Tar </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del verificarsi di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno emergente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdita di una possibilità attuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e non già da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdita di un futuro risultato utile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lucro cessante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 21 luglio viene varata la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge n.205</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articolo 7</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> attribuisce </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>al GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tutte le volte che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>al detto giudice appartenga la giurisdizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, tanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di legittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: in sostanza, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>consequenziale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (a valle dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>intervenuto annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) - innovativamente riconosciuto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dalle SSUU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sentenza n.500</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del 1999 - viene per legge attribuito alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>competenza giurisdizionale del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non più del GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">L’11 dicembre esce la sentenza della III sezione del Tar Lombardia n. 7772 che si colloca nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>filone pretorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> onde – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>gare pubbliche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA adito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (in genere da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) può </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripetere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione tecnica necessaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>verificare la spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al ricorrente del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del contratto appunto) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>denegatogli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’Amministrazione.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2001</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 30 novembre esce la sentenza del Tar Friuli Venezia Giulia n.697 che si occupa – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>respingendola</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda di risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> connessa all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullamento di provvedimenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> adottati dalla PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in materia di concorsi ed esami</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con dispendio di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalità tecnica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e dunque formulando </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un giudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; è l’ipotesi del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che assume </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un candidato inidoneo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a ricoprire il ruolo di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>professore associato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, fattispecie nella quale – specie se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’annullamento è per vizi formali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (difetto di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>istruttoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>motivazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) – l’annullamento giurisdizionale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è idoneo ad intaccare l’essenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non dovendo l’Amministrazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>necessariamente optare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>predeterminato assetto di interessi in gioco</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, residuando un certo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>margine di libertà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>relative scelte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e, verrebbe da dire, per il relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 18 dicembre esce la sentenza della VI sezione del Consiglio di Stato n. 6281 che si colloca nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>filone pretorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> onde – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>gare pubbliche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA adito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (in genere da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) può </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripetere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione tecnica necessaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>verificare la spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al ricorrente del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del contratto appunto) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>denegatogli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’Amministrazione. Per il Consiglio, laddove vi sia stata una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pubblica gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, vi è stata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una offerta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quella dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impresa esclusa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimasta non aggiudicataria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, suscettibile di essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comparata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>altre offerte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed in particolare con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quella risultata aggiudicataria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde è ben possibile </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>verificare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – in via </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>virtuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sarebbe stato l’esito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della gara in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>partecipazione dell’impresa esclusa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>corretta valutazione della relativa offerta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (che sia stata mal valutata dalla PA aggiudicatrice), e laddove dalla ridetta verifica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>affiori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che l’impresa ricorrente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sarebbe risultata aggiudicataria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, è a quel punto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>agevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il Collegio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quantificare il danno da risarcire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in termini di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato utile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lucro cessante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">). Diverso invece il caso laddove, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in luogo di una pubblica gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la PA si sia avvalsa della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trattativa privata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, giacché in tal caso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non vi è stata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nessuna gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è stata confezionata un’offerta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte dell’impresa non affidataria dell’appalto e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è pertanto possibile fare luogo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione di tipo virtuale e prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> su quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sarebbe stato l’esito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una gara che per l’appunto non si è mai celebrata, anche perché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è possibile sapere quante e quali offerte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sarebbero state presentate se in luogo della trattativa privata si fosse fatto luogo ad una gara, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quale tipologia di offerta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avrebbe in tal caso presentato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’impressa ricorrente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e se attraverso tale offerta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si sarebbe aggiudicata la gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: per il Consiglio di Stato, in presenza di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trattativa privata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>unica situazione giuridica tutelabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (se del caso, in via risarcitoria) è allora solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – vale a dire </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’astratta possibilità di un esito favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’eventuale competizione, laddove si fosse espletata – che è stata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>persa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> proprio perché la PA ha fatto luogo ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trattativa privata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> già ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2002</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 7 febbraio esce la sentenza della VI sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.686 che, in un caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impugnazione di un atto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> espressione di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalità amministrativa pura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e di connessa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesta di risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, assegna alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nozione di chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>funzione </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">dalla dottrina definita</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>esplicativa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, utilizzando (in un’ottica di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lucro cessante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> assai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno emergente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) la ridetta nozione al fine di verificare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’adeguatezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nesso di causalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittima spendita di potere discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; si tratta nella sostanza di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bilanciamento di probabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde – per dimostrare il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nesso eziologico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fatto illecito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto amministrativo illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> consistente nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdita dell’anelato bene finale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – è sufficiente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in difetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del primo avrebbero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prevalso le probabilità favorevoli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al conseguimento del bene anelato rispetto a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quelle sfavorevoli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Per il Consiglio di Stato per risarcire il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da perdita di chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> occorre che sussista una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>probabilità di successo superiore al 50%</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, alfine di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scongiurare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che divengano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcibili anche mere possibilità statisticamente non significative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Nel caso di specie il Consiglio accoglie il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ricorso demolitorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avverso un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento di sospensione per 3 mesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una impresa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dall’Albo regionale di preselezione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non essere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la stessa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>asseritamente in regola</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>versamento dei contributi Inail</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, annullando il ridetto provvedimento per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione dell’art.7</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legge 241.90</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata comunicazione di avvio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del procedimento) oltre che per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>difetto di istruttoria e di motivazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>respinge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nondimeno la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che l’impresa ha motivato con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’impossibilità di partecipare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, durante il periodo di sospensione, a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutta una serie di gare bandite</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’affidamento di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>appalti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e ciò proprio per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’indimostrata prevalenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chance di successo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in dette gare rispetto a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quelle di insuccesso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. In sostanza il Consiglio di Stato distingue non solo la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chance di conseguire il bene anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ma, più </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>a monte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chance risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, intesa quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>probabilità di riuscita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e dunque di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ottenimento del ridetto bene</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chance non risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, intesa quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mera possibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di conseguire </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’utilità sperata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: per operare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in concreto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tale distinzione occorre fare ricorso alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>teoria probabilistica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (nesso causale) osservando il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>grado di successione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>evento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e verificare se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’evento è conseguenza dell’azione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> secondo un giudizio di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>certezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>probabilità relativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilevante grado di possibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mera possibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: soltanto nelle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prime due ipotesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> può essere ammesso il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dopo aver dunque verificato la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concretezza della probabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>statisticamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> valutabile con un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio sintetico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che ammetta, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex ante</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>secondo l’</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>id quod plerumque accidit</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sulla base degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>elementi di fatto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> forniti dal danneggiato, che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pericolo di mancata verificazione dell’evento favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indipendentemente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condotta illecita della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sarebbe stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>superiore al 50%.</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 18 aprile esce la sentenza della I sezione del Tar Puglia, Lecce, n.1569, che definisce il c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>da disturbo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: si tratta di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno strettamente connesso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto di proprietà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed alle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>facoltà di godimento del bene</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che la legge riconosce al proprietario, compendiandosi quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> affiorante dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo oppositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: la PA vara </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e fa eventualmente luogo ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) che è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimo in una prima fase</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diventa illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>protrarsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei relativi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>effetti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – a causa dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inerzia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA medesima – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>oltre</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il torno temporale che può assumersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ragionevolmente tollerabile </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">dal privato, oltre che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>normalmente necessario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con riguardo alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>specifica serie procedimentale divisata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, così </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conculcando</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>libero esplicarsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>facoltà dominicali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, prima fra tutte quella coincidente con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>godimento incondizionato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene proprio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. In dottrina si richiama l’emblematico esempio di chi abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ottenuto un titolo edilizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma si sia visto poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sospendere l’attività costruttiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a cagione di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accertamenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> disposti dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Soprintendenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>protrattisi </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>sine die</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il normale ed il tollerabile. In queste ipotesi, per il Tar </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la illegittimità del ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (la PA ha agito </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>non iure</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) implica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex se</b></i></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ingiustizia del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato (la PA ha agito </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contra ius</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), onde </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’illegittimità dell’azione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> comporta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, secondo quanto già affermato in genere per gli interessi oppositivi dalle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>SSUU </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">con la</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> sentenza 500 del 1999</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, senza necessità per il privato vulnerato di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alcuna prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di tale danno.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 24 aprile esce la sentenza del Tar Abruzzo, Pescara, n.419, che si occupa del caso in cui – rilasciata una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concessione edilizia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprietario limitrofo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>opponga</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolo edilizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> impugnandolo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dinanzi al GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: in tali ipotesi, per il Tar, è ormai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>invocabile anche il risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ipotesi di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>acclarata illegittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) del gravato titolo edilizio in parola.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 27 aprile esce la sentenza del Tar Veneto n. 1605 che si colloca nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>filone pretorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> onde – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>gare pubbliche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA adito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (in genere da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) può in linea teorica </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripetere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione tecnica necessaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>verificare la spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al ricorrente del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del contratto appunto) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>denegatogli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’Amministrazione. In questi casi tuttavia appare al Collegio preferibile far ricorso alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>liquidazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>c.d. perdita della chance di esito favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno emergente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), piuttosto della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripetizione virtuale della gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> orientata, come tale, a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>verificare</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>che esito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la gara stessa avrebbe avuto laddove la PA avesse agito in modo legittimo, e dunque ad eventualmente risarcire il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lucro cessante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> connesso alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Nel caso di specie si tratta di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>affidare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte di un Comune un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>servizio di assistenza domiciliare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: il Tar </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annulla</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>delibera di affidamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sul piano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>demolitorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> mentre, su quello </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, distingue la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesta di danno da mancata aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lucro cessante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) – per il quale occorre la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rigorosa prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità della procedura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, da un lato, e del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguimento dell’aggiudicazione del servizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attività pubblica legittima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dall’altro (con conseguente necessità di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripetizione virtuale della gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesta del danno (emergente)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdita di chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per il quale è sufficiente che il ricorrente provi la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non trascurabile probabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguire il risultato utile perso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a cagione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condotta antigiuridica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tenuta dalla PA aggiudicatrice: in questo caso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non occorre un accurato giudizio tecnico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di tipo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostitutivo e virtuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma è sufficiente una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sommaria valutazione tecnica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla quale affiorano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>significative probabilità di vittoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non già la certezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della vittoria medesima), come nel caso di specie in cui il Tar accerta una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>idoneità del ricorrente a svolgere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prestazioni richieste</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> peraltro confermata, quanto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>servizio di assistenza domiciliare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attività precedentemente svolta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’impresa ricorrente, tenuto anche conto di come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il progetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sottoposto al Comune presenti, anche ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esame sommario ed atecnico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>completezza di contenuti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>puntualità espositiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 29 aprile esce la sentenza della IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.2280 che si occupa di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiesta risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> conseguente ad assunta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi legittimi oppositivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte dei proprietari di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aree interessate da una occupazione pubblica illegittima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per conferire rilievo anche ai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meri vizi procedimentali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> affettanti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’atto amministrativo illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, come nell’ipotesi – di specie – della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata comunicazione di avvio del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la quale, laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>operata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, avrebbe potuto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>imprimere alla vicenda amministrativa un diverso contenuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e cagionare un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>minor danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o non cagionarlo affatto).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 4 settembre esce la sentenza della VI sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.4435, che – laddove venga chiesto dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato partecipante ad una gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che coinvolge dunque una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalità c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>tecnica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA aggiudicatrice – assume </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>preferibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il giudice </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scongiurare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche solo a fini risarcitori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripetizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>CTU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazioni tecniche già operate dalla PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e che hanno condotto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’aggiudicazione a terzi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto al ricorrente), dovendo il detto giudice in simili ipotesi – laddove </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>possibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rinunciare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>c.d. giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> finalizzato al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed affidare tale giudizio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’Amministrazione medesima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la quale procederà - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullati gli atti di gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal GA – alla relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rinnovazione reale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non già meramente virtuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Si tratta di una presa di posizione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ancora poco propensa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a riconoscere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sindacabile dal GA la discrezionalità tecnica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA, seppure </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meramente a fini risarcitori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. E’ evidente tuttavia che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripetizione degli atti di gara ha un senso</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove vengano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>caducati gli effetti del contratto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> stipulato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>a valle dell’aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con possibilità per il ricorrente di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ottenere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, alfine, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lo stesso contratto</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e non già solo il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2003</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 12 febbraio esce la sentenza del Tribunale Regionale di Giustizia Amministrativa di Bolzano n. 48 che si colloca nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>filone pretorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> onde – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>gare pubbliche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA adito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (in genere da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) può </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ripetere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione tecnica necessaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>verificare la spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al ricorrente del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aggiudicazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del contratto appunto) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>denegatogli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’Amministrazione.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2004</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 12 marzo esce la sentenza della VI sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.1261, che si occupa di un caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>c.d. danno da disturbo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ponendosi il problema se, nel caso di specie – di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assunta lesione di un interesse oppositivo (o “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>statico</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto amministrativo illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – sia configurabile un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulla base del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice accertamento della ridetta illegittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del provvedimento. Per il Consiglio, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>innovativamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto alle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>SSUU del 2009</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura oppositiva o “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>statica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’interesse legittimo assunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>leso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può implicare in via immediata e diretta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>automatica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio di spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad esso sotteso in capo al privato: in realtà un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è necessario tanto in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi pretensivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e qui si tratta di indagare se l’istanza del privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è fondata ed accoglibile dalla PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde l’atto che la disattende si atteggia ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo diniego della ridetta spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) quanto in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi oppositivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove in quest’ultimo caso occorre indagare se, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullato l’atto lesivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appunto dell’interesse legittimo oppositivo, tale atto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non possa dalla PA essere ri-adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>emenda dei relativi vizi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>effetti sostanziali del pari pregiudizievoli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato che invochi il risarcimento del danno. Non basta dunque che il provvedimento amministrativo che ha conculcato l’interesse legittimo oppositivo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sia stato accertato illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, occorrendo – affinché si possa predicare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – che esso sia stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>acclarato affetto da ingiustizia sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non potendo pertanto, proprio in quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostanzialmente ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riproporlo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> giusta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovo esercizio del potere pubblico;</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed occorrendo, su altro crinale, che dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>acclarata illegittimità</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dell’atto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia scaturito per il privato attore un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizio effettivo e concreto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. La tesi viene applicata ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>peculiare ipotesi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, vale a dire al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>c.d. danno da disturbo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde anche laddove le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>facoltà di godimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprietario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> siano state </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>compresse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da un’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attività inerte illegittima della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, spetta comunque al privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provare in concreto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che si è verificato un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizio effettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al proprio, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>libero esercizio delle facoltà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> inerenti al proprio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto di proprietà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2006</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 31 marzo esce la sentenza della VI sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.5323 che, in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di connessa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione (illecita) dell’interesse pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato, abbraccia la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tesi favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a riconoscere al privato medesimo un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno da perdita di chance </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>funzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.d. “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>delimitativa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”). In primo luogo il Collegio precisa il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rapporto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdita di chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione dell’interesse pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nelle ipotesi in cui la PA sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolare di un potere discrezionale,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove – richiamando sul punto la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sentenza delle SSUU n.500.99</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo dal nuovo esercizio del potere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte della PA medesima </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>possono scaturire delle certezze</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta spettanza al privato del bene</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cui anela. In ipotesi simili, per il Collegio il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dovrebbe essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>negato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fino alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riedizione del potere discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o comunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tecnico-discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) ed alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rinnovazione degli atti di gara</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; tale riedizione del potere pubblico e tale rinnovazione degli atti di gara avviene tuttavia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in un altro momento e in un altro contesto storico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è detto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che possa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>coinvolgere nuovamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>parti in causa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nello </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>stesso modo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e sulla base dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>medesimi presupposti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che sono stati a base dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azione amministrativa giudicata illegittima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; proprio per questo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’unico pregiudizio risarcibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in simili ipotesi è quello </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>connesso alla perdita di chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, da intendersi quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>modello di tutela risarcitoria per equivalente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Per il Consiglio si Stato, più in specie, la chance si pone quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene patrimoniale a sé stante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giuridicamente ed economicamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> suscettibile di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autonoma valutazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e va </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>distinta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sul crinale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ontologico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dagli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>obiettivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai quali </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>essa risulta teleologicamente orientata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anelato, ed oggetto proprio di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chance di ottenimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) e dei quali essa possa costituire </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la condizione o il presupposto “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in potentia</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; dacché si evince per il Collegio che la lesione della “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>entità patrimoniale chance</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” forma oggetto di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai fini del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riconoscimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in termini di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>probabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>definitivamente perduta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, a causa di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condotta illecita altrui</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>senza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dover fare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alcun riferimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risultato auspicato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non più realizzabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>consistenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assetto potenziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2009</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 30 giugno esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.4237 che – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da disturbo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi oppositivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato – assume affiorare in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attività illegittima</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colpa </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, o comunque una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>automatica ingiustizia del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato, spettando dunque alla PA dimostrare, eventualmente, che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nessun danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha subito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2010</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 23 febbraio esce la sentenza della III sezione della Cassazione n.4326 che ribadisce come - diversamente da quanto accade in materia di interessi oppositivi – il problema dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eventuale risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> assume </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>connotati diversi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al cospetto della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi pretensivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: mentre quando il privato è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse oppositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> egli si palesa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>già direttamente collegato al bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che tende a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conservare e mantenere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nel caso dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il bene della vita </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è solo anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal privato medesimo e passa da una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione di compatibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’interesse pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> affidata al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Ciò implica – per le SSUU – come in questo caso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non sia sufficiente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per parlare di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e di connesso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) acclarare la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità dell’azione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la quale si sostanzia nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non provvedere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedere in ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>istanza del privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, occorrendo piuttosto un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il giudice (il GO) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>deve operare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tenendo come punto di riferimento la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>normativa pubblica di settore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: tale giudizio prognostico ha ad oggetto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la fondatezza o meno dell’istanza del privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di stabilire se, presentando tale istanza, il privato si sia palesato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>titolare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non già di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mera aspettativa come tale non meritevole di tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto piuttosto di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diversa e più consistente situazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> suscettibile di determinare in capo a lui un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>oggettivo affidamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>positiva conclusione della vicenda amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che – stando alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disciplina amministrativa applicabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e valutando la fattispecie </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>secondo un criterio di normalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – poteva dirsi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>destinata ad un esito favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con connessa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>erogazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, da parte della PA, del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in ultima analisi, e proprio per questo motivo, di una situazione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soggettiva giuridicamente tutelabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Il giudice, al fine di erogare il chiesto risarcimento, verificata la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità dell’azione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, deve allora </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>collocarsi </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex ante</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avvio del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al fine di verificare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la c.d. spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anelato dal privato sulla scorta della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disciplina di riferimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e secondo un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>canone di normalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: solo in questo caso potrà riconoscere un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che non potrebbe invece semplicemente scaturire da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mere e generiche aspettative</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato, né tampoco </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dal solo rapporto procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra privato e PA e dagli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eventuali affidamenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>correttezza dell’azione pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 2 luglio viene varato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decreto legislativo n.104</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>codice del processo amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articolo 30</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sembra – dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>terminologia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel complesso impiegata – abbracciare la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tesi tradizionale della responsabilità aquiliana</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della PA. Secondo il comma 1 infatti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l'azione di condanna</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> verso la PA può essere proposta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contestualmente ad altra azione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o, nei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soli casi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e nei casi di cui al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>medesimo articolo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche in via autonoma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, mentre stando al comma 2 può essere chiesta la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condanna al risarcimento del danno “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ingiusto</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivante dall'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo esercizio dell'attivita' amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancato esercizio di quella obbligatoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con evidente richiamo alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>terminologia sull’ingiustizia del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di cui all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c.. Nei casi di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – prosegue la norma - può altresì essere chiesto il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da lesione di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritti soggettivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, sussistendo i presupposti previsti dall'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>articolo 2058 del codice civile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, può essere chiesto il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno in forma specifica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con ulteriore richiamo ad una norma, l’art.2058 c.c. appunto, inserita tra le norme sul </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fatto illecito extracontrattuale.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> Dopo aver previsto al comma 3 che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda di risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e' proposta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>entro il termine di decadenza di 120 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> decorrente dal giorno in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il fatto si e' verificato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ovvero dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conoscenza del provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se il danno deriva direttamente da questo, il legislatore del codice afferma che, nel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>determinare</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il giudice </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valuta tutte le circostanze di fatto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comportamento complessivo delle parti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e, comunque, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esclude</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il risarcimento dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danni che si sarebbero potuti evitare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> usando l'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ordinaria diligenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche attraverso l'esperimento degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>strumenti di tutela previsti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con un richiamo – seppure </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>implicito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’art.1227</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c. in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contrattuale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che, tuttavia, è a propria volta richiamato, in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità aquiliana,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2056</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c.. Anche al comma 4 – onde per il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dell'eventuale danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il ricorrente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comprovi di aver subito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in conseguenza dell'</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inosservanza dolosa o colposa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del termine di conclusione del procedimento, il termine di cui al comma 3 (120 giorni) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non decorre</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fintanto che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdura l'inadempimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, iniziando tuttavia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comunque a decorrere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (in caso appunto di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio c.d. inadempimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) dopo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un anno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scadenza del termine per provvedere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – il riferimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>al dolo e alla colpa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> riportano all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c., mentre il riferimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>all’inadempimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sembra riferirsi all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.1218</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c. e dunque alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>contrattuale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>responsabilità pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>silenzio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (omesso provvedimento) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">,</span><b> </b><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">ma solo nel particolare caso in cui per l’appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la PA abbia omesso di pronunciarsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sull’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>istanza del privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>cagionandogli un danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. La norma prosegue (comma 5) affermando come nel caso in cui sia stata proposta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azione di annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> può essere formulata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nel corso del giudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o, comunque, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sino a 120 giorni dal passaggio in giudicato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sentenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; e precisando (comma 6) che di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ogni domanda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>condanna al risarcimento di danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per lesioni di interessi legittimi o, nelle materie di giurisdizione esclusiva, di diritti soggettivi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conosce esclusivamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudice amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. La presenza - sia nelle ipotesi di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azione risarcitoria autonoma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azione risarcitoria agganciata all’azione demolitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (di annullamento) - di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine decadenziale di 120 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (seppure con diversa decorrenza) fa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>grandemente scemare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’importanza fino a questo momento assunta dalla questione del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine prescrizionale applicabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>decennale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se si sottopone la responsabilità della PA all’egida precettiva dell’art.</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>1218</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c., e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quinquennale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se invece la norma di riferimento è l’art.</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2043</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> c.c. Va rilevato che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>possibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>spiccare domande di risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in via </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autonoma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>senza aver previamente attivato la tutela demolitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, comporta che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nel momento in cui scade il termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per invocare dal GA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’annullamento dell’atto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (decorsi i noti </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>60 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ancora aperto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ulteriori 60 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>120 in tutto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chiedere il risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per l’appunto, in via </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autonoma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con la conseguenza onde in queste ipotesi diventa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>molto rilevante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> affidato al GA, il quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>deve virtualmente</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutare a fini risarcitori </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">se – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullato il provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (ormai non più aggredibile) – il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avrebbe o meno conservato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il proprio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene giuridico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (interesse </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>oppositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) ovvero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ottenuto</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quello anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (interesse </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">).</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 6 luglio esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.4237 che – in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da disturbo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi oppositivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato – assume affiorare in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attività illegittima</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colpa </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, o comunque una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>automatica configurabilità del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (ingiusto) per il privato, spettando dunque alla PA dimostrare, eventualmente, che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nessun danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha subito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2012</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 23 gennaio esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.265 alla cui stregua – seguendo un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>consolidato indirizzo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>necessaria e sufficiente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità del provvedimento lesivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse oppositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per consentire al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprio titolare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>invocare il risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: egli mira infatti a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conservare un bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si colloca </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex ante</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento lesivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che lo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conculca</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde dimostrare che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento è illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ottenerne l’annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>significa </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex se</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dimostrare di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aver subito un danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che si configura dunque “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2013</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 28 febbraio esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.1220 alla cui stregua è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>necessaria e sufficiente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità del provvedimento lesivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse oppositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per consentire al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprio titolare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>invocare il risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: egli mira infatti a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conservare un bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si colloca </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex ante</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento lesivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che lo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conculca</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde dimostrare che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento è illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ottenerne l’annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>significa </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex se</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dimostrare di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aver subito un danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che si configura dunque “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 7 marzo esce la sentenza della IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.1403 secondo la quale, se è da assumersi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ammissibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>successione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>posizione processuale del giudizio di annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – atteso come la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trasmissibilità della posizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> afferente al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>patrimonio giuridico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>intercettata</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che si presenta sovente quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (nel caso di specie, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto di proprietà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del suolo oggetto di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pianificazione urbanistica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) determina </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’assunzione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>correlata titolarità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della posizione di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo (pretensivo)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - e ciò fin tanto che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non definisce </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la natura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contenuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e gli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esiti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di entrambe le posizioni giuridiche, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non altrettanto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> può predicarsi in relazione alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azione risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; ciò in quanto, per il Consiglio, la “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdita di chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>individuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, collegata come essa è alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>“</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>personalità</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” dell’interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al momento in cui esso è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>intercettato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esercizio del potere amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, afferisce ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>posizione giuridica non trasmissibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che, come tale, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può formare oggetto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> né di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trasferimento </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mortis causa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, né di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conferimento in società</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per il tramite di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regolarizzazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comunione incidentale ereditaria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>società in nome collettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. In sostanza dunque, per il Collegio, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in particolare se collegata ad una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdita di chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, appare in qualche modo “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>soggettiva</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” e come tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>intrasmissibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> né per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto tra vivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> né </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>mortis causa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, mentre è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trasmissibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (perché più “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>oggettiva</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”) la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela demolitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove connessa con un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Il Collegio aggiunge poi che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero interesse procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – vale a dire l’interesse alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>correttezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>complessiva gestione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sequenza procedimentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte della PA, secondo le regole che la governano - si pone come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione meramente strumentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di una posizione di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendosi pertanto, come tale, assumere – ove lesa - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non risarcibile in sé</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, (in quanto, diversamente opinando, si costruirebbe l’interesse legittimo come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>generica pretesa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimità dell’azione amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), rifluendo piuttosto nella più </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>generale considerazione dell’interesse legittimo pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (al quale è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>strumentale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) e dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mezzi di tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – compresa ovviamente quella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - per questo esperibili.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2014</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">*Il 28 aprile esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.2187, che si pone il problema se nel caso di specie – di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assunta lesione di un interesse oppositivo (o “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>statico</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”)</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto amministrativo illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – sia configurabile un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulla base del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice accertamento della ridetta illegittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del provvedimento. Il Consiglio ribadisce in proposito che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>natura oppositiva o “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>statica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’interesse legittimo assunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>leso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può implicare in via immediata e diretta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>automatica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio di spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad esso sotteso in capo al privato: in realtà un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è necessario tanto in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi pretensivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e qui si tratta di indagare se l’istanza del privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>è fondata ed accoglibile dalla PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, onde l’atto che la disattende si atteggia ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo diniego della ridetta spettanza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) quanto in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi oppositivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove in quest’ultimo caso occorre indagare se, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullato l’atto lesivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appunto dell’interesse legittimo oppositivo, tale atto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non possa dalla PA essere ri-adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>emenda dei relativi vizi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>effetti sostanziali del pari pregiudizievoli</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato che invochi il risarcimento del danno. Non basta dunque che il provvedimento amministrativo che ha conculcato l’interesse legittimo oppositivo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sia stato accertato illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo – affinché si possa predicare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un danno ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – che esso sia stato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>acclarato affetto da ingiustizia sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non potendo pertanto, proprio in quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostanzialmente ingiusto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riproporlo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> giusta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovo esercizio del potere pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2015</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 22 gennaio esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.252 che si occupa del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> conseguenti all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullamento di un atto amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, affermando che tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto al risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> può predicarsi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> allorché l’annullamento sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avvenuto per vizi di carattere sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dal momento che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo in tal caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> risulta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>comprovata la spettanza del bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oggetto della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pretesa del ricorrente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; quando invece il vizio riguardi la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sola forma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ovvero il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento di formazione del provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il danno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può essere invocato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il che accade allorché la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conservi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – a valle dell’annullamento del provvedimento – il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere di rinnovare il procedimento</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>emendandolo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vizio formale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> riscontrato dal GA. Per il Collegio è importante in proposito un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>richiamo all’art.34, comma 3</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, del c.p.a. 104.10, laddove si prevede che quando, nel corso del giudizio, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l'annullamento del provvedimento impugnato</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non risulta più utile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il ricorrente, il giudice </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accerta l'illegittimità dell'atto</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>se sussiste l'interesse ai fini risarcitori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: ciò significa che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non sempre</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> consegue </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giocoforza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma solo in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>determinati casi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (quelli appunto, è da intendersi, in cui l’atto sia affetto da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vizi sostanziali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) laddove permane appunto la presenza di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse ad agire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a fini </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcitori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2017</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 6 aprile esce la sentenza sezione III ter del TAR Lazio n. 3855 che, intervenendo su un caso in cui il ricorrente chiedeva, tra l’altro, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per le mancate retribuzioni a causa di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>errore nella graduatoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un concorso, afferma che l’approvazione di una nuova graduatoria con ricostruzione della carriera agli effetti giuridici è già pienamente satisfattiva per il privato. Invero, Una ricostruzione della carriera anche agli effetti economici esula dalla stretta esecuzione della sentenza, in quanto, in mancanza della prestazione lavorativa, non matura il diritto alla retribuzione (fatto salvo il particolare caso di atti illegittimi che interrompano un sinallagma già in essere, come nel caso di licenziamento illegittimo da una posizione già ricoperta dal ricorrente), mentre le differenze retributive non conseguite possono essere chieste solo a titolo di risarcimento del danno.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 4 maggio esce la sentenza della Corte costituzionale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>n.94</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che dichiara </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non fondata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la questione di legittimità costituzionale dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 30,comma 3, c.p.a.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nella parte in cui stabilisce che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>domanda di risarcimento per lesione di interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> va proposta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>entro il termine di decadenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>120 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> decorrente dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giorno in cui il fatto si è verificato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ovvero dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conoscenza del provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il danno deriva direttamente da questo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Per la Corte </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>in primis</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il legislatore, nel perseguire l’obiettivo di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sistemazione complessiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>processo amministrativo,</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ha dettato ai comma 2, 3, 4 e 5 dell<a href="http://www.altalex.com/documents/codici-altalex/2014/09/10/codice-del-processo-amministrativo#art30">’art. 30 c.p.a</a></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, un’articolata disciplina </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche dell’azione risarcitoria dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivanti dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in quest’ottica, in particolare i comma 3 e 5 del detto articolo prevedono che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cagionato per effetto della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittima attività della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> possa essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal privato attraverso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’azione di condanna</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> esercitata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in via autonoma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (comma 3), oppure spiccata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contestualmente all’azione di annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del provvedimento illegittimo o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>finanche successivamente</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>al passaggio in giudicato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della relativa sentenza (comma 5), prevedendo peraltro un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di decadenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>120 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la proponibilità delle domande risarcitorie (sia pure decorrenti da momenti differenti). Per la Corte peraltro, sulla scorta del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprio consolidato orientamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sul punto, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legislatore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> gode di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ampia discrezionalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in tema di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>disciplina degli istituti processuali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (vengono mentovate tra le tante le sentenze n. 121 e n. 44 del 2016), ciò valendo anche con specifico riferimento alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scelta di un termine decadenziale o prescrizionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a seconda delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>peculiari esigenze del procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (vengono rammentate, tra le tante, la sentenza n. 155 del 2014 e ordinanza n. 430 del 2000), fatto salvo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il solo limite</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della non </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>manifesta irragionevolezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle scelte compiute, onde la previsione del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di decadenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per l’esercizio dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azione risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non può ritenersi il frutto di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scelta viziata da manifesta irragionevolezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma costituisce l’espressione di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>coerente bilanciamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse del danneggiato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di vedersi riconosciuta la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>possibilità di agire anche a prescindere</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dalla domanda di annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eliminazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della regola della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pregiudizialità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), con l’obiettivo, di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilevante interesse pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pervenire in tempi brevi alla certezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rapporto giuridico amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche nella sua </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>declinazione risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, secondo una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>logica di stabilità degli effetti giuridici</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ben conosciuta in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rilevanti settori del diritto privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ove le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aspirazioni risarcitorie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si colleghino al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non corretto esercizio del potere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">. Peraltro, come la Corte lascia affiorare, a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contrapporsi all'interesse del privato danneggiato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si stagliano anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi pubblici di rango costituzionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quali più in specie la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>stabilità dei bilanci</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle pubbliche amministrazioni. Per quanto poi concerne la ventilata </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione del principio di uguaglianza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il relativo, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diverso trattamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> riservato dal legislatore alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione dell'interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto a quella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>del diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la Corte rappresenta come le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>due situazioni giuridiche soggettive</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> poste in comparazione sono </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>differenti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> atteggiandosi entrambe a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meritevoli di tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non necessariamente della stessa tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> donde, secondo la costante giurisprudenza della Corte medesima, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’infondatezza </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">appunto</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> della censura di violazione del principio di uguaglianza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (vengono richiamate, tra le tante, le sentenze n. 43 del 2017, n. 155 del 2014, n. 108 del 2006, n. 340 e n. 136 del 2004). Per quanto poi concerne la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presunta incostituzionalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del «</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>brevissimo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">» </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>termine di 120 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con particolare riguardo alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela del diritto di difesa del privato ricorrente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>principio del giusto processo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per la Corte va rammentato – ancora una volta sulla scorta della propria precedente giurisprudenza - che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’incongruità del termine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rilevante sul piano della violazione degli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indicati parametri costituzionali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si registra </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> qualora esso sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non idoneo a rendere effettiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>possibilità di esercizio del diritto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> cui si riferisce e di conseguenza tale da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rendere inoperante la tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> accordata al cittadino (vengono richiamate, tra le tante, le sentenze n. 44 del 2016, n. 117 del 2012 e n. 30 del 2011; ordinanze n. 417 del 2007 e n. 382 del 2005), ma atteso come nel caso di specie </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il termine di 120 giorni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> introdotto dalla norma censurata sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anche significativamente più lungo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>molti dei termini decadenziali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> previsti dal </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legislatore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia nell’ambito </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privatistico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che in quello </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pubblicistico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, l'ipotesi di incostituzionalità non appare per la Corte predicabile. Infine, la Corte analizza l'ulteriore profilo dedotto nell’ordinanza di rimessione ed inerente la presunta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>violazione degli <a href="http://www.altalex.com/documents/news/2013/11/11/diritti-e-doveri-dei-cittadini-rapporti-civili#art24">artt. 111, primo comma</a>, e <a href="http://www.altalex.com/documents/leggi/2012/10/09/ordinamento-della-repubblica-le-regioni-le-provincie-i-comuni#art117">117, primo comma, Cost</a>.</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quest’ultimo in relazione all’art. 47 della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e agli artt. 6 e 13 della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>CEDU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, sotto il profilo della violazione del principio del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giusto processo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, rappresentando </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>in primis</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> come secondo la costante giurisprudenza della Corte di giustizia, siano </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>gli Stati membri</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a dover disciplinare le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>modalità procedurali dei ricorsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, compresi quelli per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, l'unico limite dovendosi compendiare nella circostanza onde le </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>modalità di ricorso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> debbono atteggiarsi a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non discriminatorie</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela offerta per posizioni riconosciute dal diritto interno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, oltre che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tali da non rendere praticamente impossibile o eccessivamente difficile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esercizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dei </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritti conferiti</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ordinamento giuridico dell’Unione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, secondo un prisma ermeneutico al quale si ispira anche la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Corte EDU</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; attesa allora l'evidente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non riconoscibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nel caso di specie, di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>effettiva discriminazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fra tutela offerta a diritti di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ascendenza sovranazionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e diritti di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>derivazione interna</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per la Corte il ridetto termine di 120 giorni previsto dalla norma censurata, per le ragioni già esposte in precedenza, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>di per sé</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in difetto di problemi legati alla conoscibilità dell’evento dannoso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non rende </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>praticamente impossibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>eccessivamente difficile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’esercizio dei diritti conferiti dall’ordinamento giuridico dell’Unione. Solo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’incertezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dunque in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conoscibilità dell’evento dannoso -</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel singolo caso di specie e per come pare ombreggiare la Corte – potrebbe </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conculcare la tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (risarcitoria) del privato ricorrente, laddove quegli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non sia posto in grado </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">di</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> riconoscere </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il</span><b> </b><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>dies a quo</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per spiccare domanda risarcioria.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 27 novembre esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n.5546 secondo la quale, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>in primis</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, al fine di potere ottenere il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione di interessi legittimi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, occorre </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dedurre e provare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento amministrativo in ipotesi illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> abbia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impedito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di conseguire il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad esso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sotteso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal privato.</span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Proprio sulla scorta di tale principio appare al Collegio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inammissibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la domanda proposta da una ditta che ha partecipato ad una gara di appalto ed intesa a conseguire il “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>risarcimento di ogni danno subito e subendo”</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, relativo “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>tanto al lucro cessante, quanto al danno emergente”</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, senza fornire ulteriori specificazioni, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>limitandosi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad instare per una relativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>liquidazione in via equitativa, </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">trattandosi per giunta - nel caso di specie - di domanda che si pone in frizione con la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>regola generale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> espressa dall’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art. 124</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> <a href="http://www.lexitalia.it/n/2369" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">cod. proc. amm.</a>, secondo il quale il risarcimento del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno per equivalente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittima privazione dell’appalto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> deve essere “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>subito e provato”</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (comma 1). Il Collegio soggiunge che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ricorso all’equità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per la determinazione del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>quantum</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> risarcitorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> può essere ammesso soltanto in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impossibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, o di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>estrema difficoltà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, di fornire una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>precisa prova</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ammontare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del pertinente danno, e non anche in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata allegazione imputabile alla parte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che lo invoca.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 29 novembre esce la sentenza della sezione Lavoro della Cassazione n.28524 alla cui stregua, <a href="http://info.giuffre.it/e/t?q=4%3D4YRS8%26F%3DLZ%26q%3DVUZ9b%260%3DR4YNVA%26O%3D3KwJ_CrVt_N2_uunq_50_CrVt_M7zQH.5lL4KwIz8lODKlT42.lN_CrVt_M7q9HJ_uunq_50LS_uunq_50UaCdUY9cQR_uunq_50g_0q8zEqCE2_vIDKlNFKlPv_5hF_AIh5GMlM0_6_gIGLw5_4EgCA6q8zEw986qNz_5dF_y2qH0_2uLz4dN0.9wG7_ITwk_TiOED_vIFIf9_CrVt_N5G9b_EhQDChNE6u_LltS_VQLwG_86gCFD_uunq_68zDdC7_ITwk_S9OED_f58GdC2E2d5v_uunq_68Y6J%268%3D%264J%3D5cQWC" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">in tema di </a></span><a href="http://info.giuffre.it/e/t?q=4%3D4YRS8%26F%3DLZ%26q%3DVUZ9b%260%3DR4YNVA%26O%3D3KwJ_CrVt_N2_uunq_50_CrVt_M7zQH.5lL4KwIz8lODKlT42.lN_CrVt_M7q9HJ_uunq_50LS_uunq_50UaCdUY9cQR_uunq_50g_0q8zEqCE2_vIDKlNFKlPv_5hF_AIh5GMlM0_6_gIGLw5_4EgCA6q8zEw986qNz_5dF_y2qH0_2uLz4dN0.9wG7_ITwk_TiOED_vIFIf9_CrVt_N5G9b_EhQDChNE6u_LltS_VQLwG_86gCFD_uunq_68zDdC7_ITwk_S9OED_f58GdC2E2d5v_uunq_68Y6J%268%3D%264J%3D5cQWC" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rapporto di agenzia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>recesso senza preavviso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> intimato da una delle parti all’altra attribuisce alla parte che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>subisce</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il recesso (normalmente, l’agente) il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto all’indennità sostitutiva del preavviso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e ciò </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indipendentemente dall’effettiva sussistenza del pregiudizio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che l’indennità in questione è destinata a ristorare, posto che tale indennità è prevista quale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguenza automatica e predeterminata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del recesso con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>effetto immediato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, intimato dalla controparte, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> assistito da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giusta causa</b></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: è una fattispecie assimilabile a quella del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che lede </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interessi oppositivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con riconoscibilità di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno automatico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 15 dicembre esce la sentenza delle S.U. n. 30221 che riconosce la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulla domanda di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> derivante dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>gestione dell’istruttoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un procedimento sulla domanda di erogazione di aiuti finanziari latamente discrezionali in quanto, implicando valutazioni di opportunità e convenienza circa la meritevolezza dell’impresa richiedente, onde garantire l’impiego oculato di risorse pubbliche ed evitare che l’agevolazione concretizzi una perdita certa per l’erario, non si risolve in una sequenza di singoli comportamenti dei funzionari investiti del relativo potere ma integra una condotta tipica amministrativa di impostazione di contatti ed interlocuzioni con la richiedente volti, anche con provvedimenti formali, a conseguire le condizioni migliori affinché l’impegno delle risorse pubbliche possa valutarsi vantaggioso o quanto meno non destinato ad una prognosi sicuramente sfavorevole.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2018</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 22 gennaio esce la sentenza della II sezione del TAR Lazio n. 788 che accoglie la domanda di risarcimento del danno derivante dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>revoca di un provvedimento autorizzatorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in quanto l’atto di secondo grado, non fondato su valide ragioni di pubblico interesse, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">impedisce, ingiustificatamente, l’attività del commercio su area pubblica, e, causa, conseguentemente, un danno ingiusto, costituito dalla perdita, per l’interessato, della possibilità di guadagno correlata all’esercizio della medesima attività</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 2 marzo esce la sentenza delle S.U. n. 4996 che riconosce la giurisdizione del GO sulla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">domanda risarcitoria proposta nei confronti della P.A. per i danni subiti dal privato che abbia fatto incolpevole affidamento su un provvedimento ampliativo illegittimo, non trattandosi di una lesione dell’interesse legittimo pretensivo del danneggiato (interesse soddisfatto, seppur in modo illegittimo), ma di una lesione della sua integrità patrimoniale ex art. 2043 c.c., rispetto alla quale l’esercizio del potere amministrativo non rileva in sé, ma per l’efficacia causale del danno-evento da affidamento incolpevole.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 6 marzo esce la sentenza della III sezione del Consiglio di Stato n. 1409 in tema di risarcimento del danno derivante dall’adozione di informative antimafia. Ricorda il Collegio che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colpa dell’amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai fini del riconoscimento del risarcimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">dev’essere scrutinata in coerenza con la funzione, con la natura e con i contenuti delle relative misure; andrà, in particolare, riconosciuto il dovuto rilievo alla portata della regola di azione, alla quale devono rispondere i Prefetti nell’esercizio della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potestà</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in questione, che si rivela particolarmente sfuggente e di difficile decifrazione. Non può dimenticarsi, infatti, che il risarcimento del danno dovuto per lesione di interessi legittimi non è una conseguenza diretta e costante dell’annullamento giurisdizionale di un atto amministrativo, in quanto richiede la positiva verifica, oltre che della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della situazione giuridica soggettiva di interesse tutelata dall’ordinamento, anche del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nesso causale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra l’illecito e il danno subito, nonché della sussistenza della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>colpa o del dolo dell’amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 1° giugno esce la sentenza della III sezione del TAR Lombardia n. 1407 che riconduce alla giurisdizione del GO una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">controversia avente ad oggetto la richiesta di risarcimento del danno avanzata da una società nei confronti della P.A., nel caso in cui il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>thema decidendum</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> attenga alla pretesa risarcitoria derivante dall’incolpevole affidamento del privato su un provvedimento amministrativo ampliativo della propria sfera giuridica, poi annullato in quanto illegittimo. Secondo il TAR, infatti, la controversia riguarda non l’illegittimo esercizio del potere pubblico e la lesione di un interesse legittimo pretensivo, bensì la lesione della integrità patrimoniale della società istante, ovvero di una situazione di diritto soggettivo; in particolare, la copa dell’Amministrazione è da rinvenirsi nell’aver indotto il privato a sostenere spese nel ragionevole convincimento della legittimità dell’atto.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">L’8 giugno esce la sentenza della III sezione del TAR Sicilia-Palermo n. 1291 che solleva un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conflitto negativo di giurisdizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avendo il GO declinato la propria giurisdizione in un caso in cui il privato chiedeva il risarcimento per aver l’amministrazione leso una legittima aspettativa alla ricezione di un finanziamento pubblico – cui era stato già ammesso – sulla base di un provvedimento poi revocato in autotutela per mancanza di fondi, pur essendo la PA a conoscenza di tale mancanza di fondi da molto tempo prima rispetto all’adozione del provvedimento di secondo grado.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 13 dicembre esce la sentenza delle SU n. 32365 che, risolvendo il conflitto negativo di giurisdizione sollevato dal TAR Sicilia, ribadisce – ancora una volta – la validità del criterio della domanda (e quindi del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>petitum</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sostanziale) al fine del riparto della giurisdizione tra GO e GA. Viene ricordato che il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>petitum</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> deve essere identificato, non solo e non tanto in funzione della concreta pronuncia che si chiede al giudice, quanto, soprattutto, in funzione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>causa petendi</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ossia dell’intrinseca natura della posizione dedotta in giudizio, da individuarsi con riguardo ai fatti allegati. Di conseguenza, prosegue la Corte, l’attrazione della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela risarcitoria dinanzi al GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> può verificarsi soltanto qualora il danno patito dal soggetto che agisce nei confronti della PA sia conseguenza immediata e diretta della dedotta illegittimità del provvedimento che egli ha impugnato, mentre si è al di fuori della giurisdizione amministrativa se viene in rilievo una fattispecie complessa in cui l’emanazione di un provvedimento favorevole, che venga successivamente annullato in quanto illegittimo, si configura solo come uno dei presupposti dell’azione risarcitoria che si fonda altresì sulla capacità del provvedimento di determinare l’affidamento dell’interessato e la lesione del suo patrimonio, che consegue a tale affidamento e alla sopravvenuta caducazione del provvedimento favorevole. Spetta quindi al GO la giurisdizione su un’azione risarcitoria proposta dal titolare di una impresa ittica nei confronti della Regione Siciliana a seguito della revoca del contributo per le nuove costruzioni di natanti da pesca disposta a distanza di alcuni anni dal decreto di approvazione della graduatoria e di sua comunicazione.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 28 dicembre esce la sentenza del TAR Calabria n. 780 che, giudicando in un caso di illegittima adozione di un’interdittiva antimafia, si concentra sull’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>onere probatorio </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">dell’azione risarcitoria a tutela degli interessi legittimi. In particolare, secondo il TAR, non è possibile pervenire ad </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>alcuna deroga</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla regola generale posta dall’art. 2697 c.c. in quanto si tratta di provare fatti che ricadono nella sfera giuridica dell’interessato e, pertanto, non è necessario riequilibrare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’asimmetria informativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tra Pubblica Amministrazione e privato, che contraddistingue l’esercizio del pubblico potere ed il correlato rimedio dell’azione di impugnazione: spetta quindi a colui che fa valere il diritto in giudizio dare prova di tutti gli elementi costitutivi della pretesa risarcitoria.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2019</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 3 gennaio esce la sentenza della I sezione del TAR Liguria n. 11 in tema di onere probatorio della pretesa risarcitoria. Secondo il TAR, in caso di annullamento in sede giurisdizionale di un atto che sospendeva i lavori di ristrutturazione di una piazza, è indubbio che il provvedimento sia stato foriero di danno in quanto comportante un rallentamento dei lavori e, di conseguenza, un danno per la ditta esecutrice.</span></p> <p class="western" align="center"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">* * *</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 18 febbraio esce la sentenza della III sezione del TAR Puglia – sede di Lecce – n. 261 che richiama il consolidato orientamento secondo cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">l’attrazione della tutela risarcitoria dinanzi al giudice amministrativo può verificarsi soltanto qualora il danno patito dal soggetto che agisce nei confronti della pubblica amministrazione sia conseguenza immediata e diretta della dedotta illegittimità del provvedimento che ha impugnato. Mentre si è al di fuori della giurisdizione amministrativa se viene in rilievo una fattispecie complessa in cui l’emanazione di un provvedimento favorevole, che venga successivamente annullato in quanto illegittimo, si configura solo come uno dei presupposti dell’azione risarcitoria che si fonda altresì sulla capacità del provvedimento di determinare l’affidamento dell’interessato e la lesione del suo patrimonio, che consegue a tale affidamento e alla sopravvenuta caducazione del provvedimento favorevole. Né è idoneo ad attrarre la controversia nella giurisdizione del giudice amministrativo il richiamo della legislazione speciale che attribuisce competenza giurisdizionale esclusiva all’autorità giudiziaria amministrativa.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Anche nell’ipotesi dell'attribuzione di un settore di competenza alla A.G.A. permane infatti la linea di discrimine fra azioni risarcitorie dipendenti dall’illegittimità dell’atto e azioni risarcitorie dipendenti dall’affidamento derivato dal comportamento della pubblica amministrazione, rimanendo privo di rilievo che tale comportamento sia più o meno direttamente connesso all’esercizio dell’attività appartenente al settore di competenza esclusiva. Nel secondo caso il soggetto leso denuncia non già la lesione del suo interesse legittimo pretensivo bensì quella della sua integrità patrimoniale derivata dall’affidamento incolpevole sulla legittimità dell’attribuzione favorevole poi caducata. Viene quindi in rilievo in questa ipotesi non solo la situazione lesa, ma anche la natura stessa del comportamento lesivo che non consiste tanto ed esclusivamente nella illegittimità dell’agire della p.a. ma piuttosto nella violazione del principio generale del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>neminem laedere</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">,</span></p> <p class="western" align="center"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">* * *</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 24 giugno esce la sentenza della I sezione del TAR Umbria n. 367 secondo cui è inammissibile un ricorso giurisdizionale tendente ad ottenere il risarcimento del danno da provvedimento amministrativo favorevole (successivamente annullato), ove il pregiudizio patrimoniale prospettato dall’istante, sia sotto il profilo del danno emergente che del lucro cessante, sia del tutto ipotetico e inattuale, dipendendo da eventi futuri quanto incerti, avendo il danneggiato l’onere integrale della prova della sussistenza del danno lamentato, che deve essere sin dalla proposizione dell’azione concreto ed attuale, senza alcuna attenuazione del principio dispositivo di cui all’art. 2697 c.c..</span></p> <p class="western" align="center"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">* * *</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 19 agosto esce la sentenza della V sezione del Consiglio di Stato n. 5737 onde il risarcimento del danno conseguente alla lesione di situazioni soggettive aventi la consistenza dell’interesse legittimo pretensivo è, per consolidato orientamento giurisprudenziale, subordinato all’accertamento, in termini di certezza o, quanto meno, di probabilità vicina alla certezza, della spettanza del bene della vita oggetto dell’aspettativa giuridicamente tutelata.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Ne deriva che, nei casi in cui la lesione discenda da una illegittimità provvedimentale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>accertata solo sul piano dei vizi formali</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e, quindi, per definizione, senza il riconoscimento della fondatezza della pretesa sostanziale) il danno può essere riconosciuto soltanto all’esito della (doverosa) riedizione dell’azione amministrativa (correlata all’effetto conformativo del giudicato o, più correttamente, dell’annullamento, che opera, sul piano giuridico, eliminando l’atto che, con la sua adozione, aveva estinto l’obbligo di provvedere sulla istanza privata e riattivando, con ciò, l’obbligo di riprovvedere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ex </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">art. 2 l. n. 241/1990): ciò perché solo all’esito del satisfattivo riesercizio del potere potrà dirsi accertata la spettanza del bene della vita.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il principio – che, come ben è dato intendere, fa del danno da pretesa negata una forma di danno (per definizione) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>da ritardo qualificato</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – non trova smentita, ma anzi conferma nelle situazioni in cui sia, a vario titolo, impossibile (in correlazione alle sopravvenienze fattuali o normative ad attitudine impeditiva o preclusiva) il rinnovo del procedimento e, con esso, l’attuazione del giudicato: nel qual caso, che prefigura l’impossibilità di una tutela </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>specifica</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il danno è riconoscibile in termini di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>equivalente </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">del bene della vita definitivamente perduto.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Del resto, al privato pregiudicato da un provvedimento amministrativo riconosciuto illegittimo non può essere riconosciuta la facoltà di abdicare alla pretesa di rinnovo del procedimento, di fatto optando per la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>monetizzazione </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">del bene della vita: con il che, appunto, il danno da pretesa abusivamente conculcata può essere solo ed alternativamente: </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>a</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) preordinato a coprire il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>ritardo </i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">nella soddisfazione della pretesa; </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>b</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) ovvero a surrogare, per equivalente, la perdita dell’utilità, imputabile all’inadempimento dell’Amministrazione (che corre il rischio delle sopravvenienze, giusta l’ordinario principio della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>perpetuatio obligationis</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">).</span></p> <p class="western" align="center"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">* * *</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 18 ottobre esce la sentenza della IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n. 7082 che ribadisce l’orientamento consolidato secondo cui la responsabilità risarcitoria dell’Amministrazione deve essere negata laddove il pregiudizio sia stato cagionato da un’attività amministrativa ascrivibile ad errore scusabile per la sussistenza di contrasti giudiziari, per l'incertezza del quadro normativo di riferimento o per la complessità della situazione di fatto (cfr., ex plurimis, Cons. Stato, Sez. IV, 7 gennaio 2013, n. 23; Sez. V, 31 luglio 2012, n. 4337, richiamati da Cons. Stato, Sez. III, 11 settembre 2019, n. 6138). </span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Per la configurabilità della colpa dell'Amministrazione, in altri termini, occorre avere riguardo al carattere della regola di azione violata: se la stessa è chiara, univoca e cogente, si dovrà riconoscere la sussistenza dell'elemento psicologico nella sua violazione; al contrario, se il canone della condotta amministrativa giudicata è ambiguo, equivoco o, comunque, costruito in modo tale da affidare all'Autorità amministrativa un elevato grado di discrezionalità, la colpa potrà essere accertata solo nelle ipotesi in cui il potere sia stato esercitato in palese spregio delle regole di correttezza e di proporzionalità. Ed, infatti, a fronte di regole di condotta inidonee a costituire, di per sé, un canone di azione sicuro e vincolante, la responsabilità dell'Amministrazione potrà essere affermata nei soli casi in cui l'azione amministrativa ha disatteso, in maniera macroscopica ed evidente, i criteri del buon andamento e dell'imparzialità, restando ogni altra violazione assorbita nel perimetro dell'errore scusabile.</span></p> <p class="western" align="center"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">* * *</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 14 novembre esce la sentenza della IV sezione del Consiglio di Stato n. 7831, onde, ai sensi dell’art. 34, comma 3, c.p.a., per ottenere, ai fini risarcitori, la pronuncia del giudice sulla illegittimità del provvedimento impugnato, il cui annullamento non risulti più utile per il ricorrente, è sempre necessaria la domanda della parte, non potendo la stessa disposizione essere interpretata in modo “automatico” ai fini del riconoscimento dell’interesse risarcitorio.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Spiega il Collegio come Il termine di diciotto mesi di cui all’art. 21 nonies della legge n. 241/90, non può avere una funzione “sanante” dei provvedimenti illegittimi adottati precedentemente all’entrata in vigore della norma di modifica della stessa disposizione, cosicché il medesimo termine deve essere computato a decorrere da tale data. Una diversa interpretazione, oltre a porsi in contrasto con il generale principio di irretroattività della legge (art. 11 preleggi), finirebbe infatti per limitare in maniera eccessiva ed irragionevole l’esercizio del potere di autotutela amministrativa.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Invero, la previsione dell’ art. 21 nonies, della legge n. 241/1990 se da un lato segna il definitivo superamento della teoria dell’inconsumabilità del potere di autotutela (o di quella che un risalente orientamento definisce “la perennità della potestà amministrativa di annullare in autotutela gli atti invalidi”) non consente, neppure nel testo originario, di prescindere, ai fini della valutazione del tema della ragionevolezza, dalla originaria illegittimità dell’atto e dalla rilevanza dell’interesse pubblico concreto ed attuale alla sua rimozione nell’ambito di un percorso strettamente connesso a quello di esigibilità in capo all’Amministrazione. In pratica, deve ritenersi integrata la nozione di termine ragionevole tutte le volte che lo stesso decorre dal momento in cui l’Amministrazione è venuta concretamente a conoscenza dei profili di illegittimità dell’atto.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>2020</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il 15 gennaio esce l’ordinanza della Sezione Lavoro della Cassazione n. 712 che richiama il consolidato indirizzo secondo cui, in tema di impiego pubblico privatizzato, gli atti di conferimento di incarichi dirigenziali rivestono la natura di determinazioni negoziali cui devono applicarsi i criteri generali di correttezza e buona fede, alla stregua dei principi di imparzialità e di buon andamento di cui all'art. 97 Cost., che obbligano la P.A. a valutazioni comparative motivate, senza alcun automatismo della scelta, che resta rimessa alla discrezionalità del datore di lavoro, cui corrisponde una posizione soggettiva di interesse legittimo degli aspiranti all'incarico, tutelabile ai sensi dell'art. 2907 cod. civ., anche in forma risarcitoria.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Ne consegue che, ove la P.A. non abbia fornito elementi circa i criteri e le motivazioni della selezione, l'illegittimità della stessa richiederà una nuova valutazione, sempre ad opera del datore di lavoro, senza possibilità di un intervento sostitutivo del giudice, salvo i casi di attività vincolata e non discrezionale.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Costituisce ulteriore specificazione di tale principio, ricorda la Corte, che la suddetta posizione soggettiva di interesse legittimo di diritto privato è suscettibile di tutela giurisdizionale, anche in forma risarcitoria, a condizione che l'interessato ne alleghi e provi la lesione, nonché il danno subito in dipendenza dell'inadempimento degli obblighi gravanti sull'amministrazione, senza che la pretesa risarcitoria possa fondarsi sulla lesione del diritto al conferimento dell'incarico, che non sussiste prima della stipula del contratto con la P.A.</span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Questioni intriganti</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Dal punto di vista processuale, cosa impedisce il risarcimento del danno inferto ad interessi legittimi prima del 1999?</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sistema di giustizia amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appare caratterizzato da una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>struttura bifasica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che – facendo luogo ad una sorta di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>corto circuito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impedisce ad entrambi i giudici </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">coinvolti, GA e GO, di procedere al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e ciò in quanto:</span></p> <ol type="a"> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è il giudice dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fornito di sola tutela demolitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, potendo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esclusivamente annullare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che ne sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, senza poter condannare al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (salvi i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritti patrimoniali c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>consequenziali</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giurisdizione esclusiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">);</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GO</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è il giudice del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diritto soggettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e può procedere al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad esso inferti, ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> può conoscere dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dal momento che – stante il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riparto di giurisdizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> fondato sulla c.d. </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>causa petendi</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> o “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>petitum sostanziale</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”, vale a dire sulla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione giuridica soggettiva</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> assunta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal privato che agisce – laddove quegli invochi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un interesse legittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il detto giudice deve </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giocoforza declinare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la propria giurisdizione </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>a beneficio del GA </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">(che tuttavia, come visto, può </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non risarcire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">).</span></p> </li> </ol> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Quali questioni “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>di danno</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” pone la lesione dell’interesse legittimo oppositivo da parte di un atto amministrativo illegittimo?</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Si tratta di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>problematica rilevante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in specie </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da quando</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è possibile </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accedere alla tutela risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>senza aver previamente attivato quella demolitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque anche nel caso in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’atto lesivo e produttivo di danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimasto legittimo ed efficace</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più aggredibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (per ottenere tutela </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in forma specifica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) ma sia per l’appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ancora possibile chiedere il risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (tutela </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>per equivalente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">):</span></p> <ol type="a"> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>necessaria e sufficiente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del provvedimento lesivo di interesse oppositivo per consentire al proprio titolare di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>invocare il risarcimento dei danni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: egli mira infatti a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conservare un bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si colloca </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex ante</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto al provvedimento lesivo, sicché dimostrare che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>il provvedimento è illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ed (eventualmente) ottenerne </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, significa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex se</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dimostrare di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aver subito un danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che si configura dunque “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>strettamente avvinto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appunto alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità del provvedimento amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; </span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">si rappresenta tuttavia in senso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>critico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che, qualora il provvedimento sia illegittimo (e sia annullato) per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meri vizi formali o procedimentali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, esso potrebbe </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>essere ri-adottato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> conculcando </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>stavolta </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>secundum legem</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dal punto di vista </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>privato portatore</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’interesse oppositivo; del resto si rammenta la valorizzazione che proprio le SSUU con la svolta del 1999 hanno inteso imprimere al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sottostante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse giuridicamente rilevante leso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dall’azione pubblica, onde laddove la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pretesa a tale bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (al relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mantenimento e conservazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) si riveli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>infondata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal punto di vista </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può configurarsi un danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità meramente formale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del provvedimento amministrativo che ha tuttavia correttamente (dal punto di vista </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sottratto il bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato titolare (come quando un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>permesso di costruire</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> andava </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullato in sede di autotutela</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, anche se </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in un primo momento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’atto di autotutela è risultato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>viziato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal punto di vista </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>meramente formale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); su questo crinale, solo laddove il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vizio dell’atto amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ingiustizia del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da lesione di interesse oppositivo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>deve intendersi </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in re ipsa</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in costanza di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’atto stesso, mentre in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vizio meramente formale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si rischierebbe – adottando la medesima </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soluzione “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>automatica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>iperprotezione degli interessi legittimi oppositivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, del tutto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sganciata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pretesa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al (mantenimento del) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita sottostante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (configurantesi peraltro come </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pretesa ad un “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>non facere</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’Amministrazione);</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">in via ancora più specifica, si ritiene </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>insoddisfacente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anche un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riferimento generico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ai </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vizi meramente formali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, potendo darsi in determinati casi che la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presenza di certi vizi formali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che affettano il provvedimento sia tale da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non implicare la certezza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>emendato l’atto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>simili vizi formali</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il provvedimento </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimarrebbe comunque sfavorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato (con conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non configurabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di pretesi danni); mentre infatti in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere vincolato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>certo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che emendare il vizio formale da parte della PA significa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dare al provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (ormai formalmente ineccepibile) quel </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contenuto (sfavorevole) che non può non avere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove la PA goda di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è ben possibile che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’emenda del vizio formale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sospinga verso un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento favorevole per l’interessato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con conseguente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>amplificarsi della portata lesiva </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">del primo provvedimento, formalmente illegittimo, che ha </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conculcato il bene</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conservazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il privato medesimo legittimamente anelava; in questa ipotesi, secondo una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>certa opzione dottrinale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il privato può essere ammesso a provare di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>aver subito un danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perdita di chance</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anche invocando in via </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>autonoma</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il risarcimento dei danni subiti in conseguenza di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un atto illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (senza averne tuttavia chiesto la demolizione), potendo provare che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in caso di annullamento tempestivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>successiva riedizione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte della PA, egli </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avrebbe avuto delle chance di conservare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il bene della vita alfine sottrattogli dall’azione pubblica, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ancorando</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> tuttavia tali chance non già al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mero caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, quanto piuttosto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contenuto precettivo specifico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>norme violate</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: si fa l’esempio di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>atto illegittimo per incompetenza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove mentre se si tratta di incompetenza </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>per territorio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> appare più difficile assumere configurabili </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chance di diverso (e più favorevole) esito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della vicenda amministrativa per il privato, se si tratta invece di incompetenza </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>per materia</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> affidata all’organo pubblico competente, in possesso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>maggiore esperienza</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più ampio e dettagliato novero di elementi conoscitivi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto a quello incompetente può far ragionevolmente ritenere possibile (o probabile) l’eventuale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ipotetica adozione di un provvedimento diverso e più favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per il privato destinatario;</span></p> </li> </ol> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>Quali questioni “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>di danno</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” pone la lesione dell’interesse legittimo pretensivo da parte di un atto amministrativo illegittimo?</b></span></p> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">Il giudice che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcisce il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> lo fa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>a valle</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di uno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scandaglio dell’azione amministrativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, col rischio di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostituirsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad essa ed alle relative </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazioni</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, seppure nell’ottica della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutela “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>per equivalente</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (risarcimento del danno), che tuttavia – proprio </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>come tale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presuppone</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata erogazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato (“</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in forma specifica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”) – da parte della PA – del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anelato dal privato medesimo ed assunto “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>dovutogli</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” dall’Amministrazione; si tratta ancora una volta di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>problematica divenuta vieppiù rilevante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in specie </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da quando</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è possibile </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>accedere alla tutela risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anche </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>senza aver previamente attivato quella demolitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e dunque anche nel caso in cui </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’atto lesivo e produttivo di danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rimasto legittimo ed efficace</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più aggredibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (per ottenere tutela </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in forma specifica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) ma sia per l’appunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ancora possibile chiedere il risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (tutela </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>per equivalente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); il mentovato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>rischio di sostituzione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del giudice alla PA:</span></p> <ol type="a"> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>elevatissimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> allorché la PA disponga di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>consistenti margini di discrezionalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in ordine alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione di compatibilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta erogazione al privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da questi “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>preteso</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">”; in questo caso il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>difficile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dacché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in difetto di azione pubblica illegittima</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è detto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avrebbe ottenuto il bene della vita anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non potendo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dunque essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una mancata utilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse all’ottenimento della quale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> non si presentava </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutelato in via incondizionata dall’ordinamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in questa fattispecie, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcire il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> potrebbe infatti voler dire </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>“</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>erogare</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” al privato “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>per equivalente</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ciò che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo la PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non il giudice</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) potrebbe </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalmente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> valutare </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dovuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> “</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>in forma specifica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">” ovvero </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non dovuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, perché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>incompatibile con l’interesse pubblico </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">anche</span><b> </b><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">solo per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>motivi di opportunità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>merito amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); in queste ipotesi, solo se la PA – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da parte del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riconosce</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, si fa luogo al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato ricorrente medesimo, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i>sub specie</i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>danno da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; si osserva tuttavia dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dottrina più critica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che proprio il fatto che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>scatta il risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (da </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) può sospingere la PA verso un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovo provvedimento di diniego</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del bene anelato, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diversamente motivato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non potendosi poi pretermettere la circostanza onde </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in ogni caso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e dunque anche allorché il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>secondo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> provvedimento sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>positivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) la tutela risarcitoria </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>si proietta più avanti nel tempo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e precisamente al momento in cui la PA – che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in una prima fase </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">lo ha </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>negato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – eroga al privato, su </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sollecitazione del GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, il bene da questi anelato; peraltro, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ancorare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il risarcimento del danno per il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sempre e comunque</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ad un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovo e positivo provvedimento tardivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> significa imporre al privato di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>chiedere l’erogazione di tale provvedimento anche</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> allorché esso </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non sia più utile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, per esempio per essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>intervenuto </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>medio tempore</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> uno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ius superveniens</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sfavorevole, che lo rende </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non eseguibile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; una soluzione proposta è quella di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>legittimare il privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - anche in presenza di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalità pura della PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – all’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>azione risarcitoria dinanzi al GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo l’Amministrazione che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha già negato in sede sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> l’erogazione dell’anelato bene della vita </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giustificare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, questa volta </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in sede processuale (risarcitoria) e giusta riedizione </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">della</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> propria attività discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, tale </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>mancata erogazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> pur al cospetto della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prima determinazione negativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, così </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>negando il conforto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico positivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> operato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>prima facie</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal GA medesimo in sede risarcitoria; si tratta di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>riedizione virtuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere discrezionale amministrativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in sede </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>processuale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che andrebbe però poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bissata in sede reale e sostanziale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla PA nel bacino di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>apposito procedimento</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>a valle</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del giudizio innanzi al GA; in questo ambito può allora essere rilevante </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’eventuale tecnica risarcitoria</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> avente ad oggetto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la chance di provvedimento favorevole</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, proprio tutte le volte in cui, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>annullato dal GA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non impugnato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> espressione di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>potere discrezionale puro</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’Amministrazione, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>residua ancora potere discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> da spendere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in capo alla PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, che potrebbe (o </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avrebbe potuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tempestiva impugnazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguente annullamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’atto) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovamente esitare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>diniego</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato dell’anelato bene della vita: questi può essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> laddove dimostri che, pur </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non essendo certo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avrebbe ottenuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il bene della vita in parola, ha comunque </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>perso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – a causa dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimo contegno pubblico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>seria chance di raggiungerlo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, compendiandosi la chance proprio nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>concreta possibilità di conseguire un risultato utile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che va a braccetto con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’indimostrato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (e </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>indimostrabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>futuro raggiungimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del ridetto bene; ci si trova nel contesto di una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>successione di eventi potenzialmente idonei</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a consentire il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>raggiungimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risultato vantaggioso</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed interviene </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>un fatto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (nel caso si specie, l’atto illegittimo della PA) che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interrompe questa successione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> talvolta con carattere di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assoluta immodificabilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (l’atto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non è stato impugnato nei termini</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>consolidando</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>situazione negativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>impossibilità di verificare compiutamente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> se la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>probabilità di realizzazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del risultato sperato (ottenimento del bene della vita) si sarebbe poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tradotta o meno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel relativo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conseguimento effettivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>pari a zero</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quando </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>l’attività della PA è vincolata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: in questo caso la PA, al cospetto di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dati presupposti di fatto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>deve erogare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> al privato il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>preteso</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, essendo ciò </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>previsto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">:</span><b> </b><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">a.1)</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> dalla legge</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (che disegna appunto una attività amministrativa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>vincolata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); a.2) </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>dal giudice</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (allorché l’attività </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nasca </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex lege</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> come discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma avendo la PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>denegato il bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>prima volta</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento illegittimo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, e poi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una seconda</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> con un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>nuovo provvedimento illegittimo diversamente motivato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a valle dell’annullamento da parte del GA del primo diniego, tale sentenza </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>passi in giudicato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, con </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>trasformazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attività discrezionale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attività vincolata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); a.3) dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>stessa Amministrazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che si sia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>auto-vincolata in modo penetrante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, riducendo in modo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>totalizzante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la propria </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalità valutativa</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, come nella fattispecie della </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>erogazione di sussidi, contributi e vantaggi finanziari</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove la legge prevede appunto che la stessa PA </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>detti criteri e modalità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>specificamente ne definiscano</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> i </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>presupposti di erogazione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>art.12</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della legge 241.90); in questo caso il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>semplice</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dacché </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in difetto di azione pubblica illegittima</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>avrebbe ottenuto il bene della vita anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, dovendo dunque essere </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcito</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> per </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tale mancata utilità</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, l’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse all’ottenimento della quale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si presentava </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tutelato dall’ordinamento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">è </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più o meno elevato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> quando l’erogazione al privato del bene della vita dipenda dalla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>c.d. “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>discrezionalità tecnica</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">: in questa ipotesi – la </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più rilevante</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> delle quali si presenta in materia di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>gare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e di</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> concorsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, laddove il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita anelato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dal privato titolare dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse legittimo pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> è appunto il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>contratto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che la PA che bandisce intende affidare o comunque stipulare, dovendo all’uopo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>individuare l’interlocutore privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> - </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcire il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> significa </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assumere “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>tecnicamente</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>” dovuto</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dalla PA un bene della vita </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>preteso dal privato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> e che tuttavia </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>la PA</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, nell’interesse pubblico, ha assunto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non dovuto proprio</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> sulla base di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio “</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>tecnico</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>”</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; in simili fattispecie: c.1) chi assume </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non sindacabile dal GA la discrezionalità tecnica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’Amministrazione, assimilando quest’ultima al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>merito amministrativo (</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">e dunque alla </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>discrezionalità pura</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), correlativamente </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>esclude</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> la possibilità per il GA medesimo di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>formulare un giudizio prognostico </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><i><b>ex ante</b></i></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>soli fini risarcitori</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, non potendo il giudice medesimo, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>neppure al solo fine</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di condannare la PA a </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcire il danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sostituirsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> alla PA medesima in una </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>valutazione tecnica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>solo essa può operare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (tesi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>più remota</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">); c.2) chi </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>assume sindacabile dal GA la discrezionalità tecnica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> dell’Amministrazione, in modo più o meno profondo (sindacato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>forte</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in caso di </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>attività tecnicamente del tutto vincolata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, o sindacato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>debole </b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">in caso di</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b> attività tecnicamente in parte vincolata</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">), ritiene al contrario che il GA possa – in modo </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>del pari più o meno profondo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> – operare il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio prognostico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> finalizzato al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>risarcimento del danno</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (per equivalente) al privato che si sia visto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>illegittimamente denegare</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>bene della vita</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> anelato (che avrebbe inteso ottenere in forma specifica) sulla base di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>giudizio tecnico</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> che è stato compiuto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>in modo valutato errato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">.</span></p> </li> </ol> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, 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, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">entrambi hanno a presupposto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>una inerzia della PA</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>fuori asse</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> rispetto al </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>quadro ordinamentale vigente</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">;</span></p> </li> <li> <p class="western" align="justify"><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il danno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da ritardo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si risolve nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse pretensivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato, che a causa dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inerzia pubblica</b></span> <span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non si vede erogato</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento ampliativo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> della propria </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>sfera giuridica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> nel termine divisato per la conclusione del procedimento; il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non ottiene nei termini</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, 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, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">il danno </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>da disturbo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> si risolve nella </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>lesione</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>interesse oppositivo</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> del privato, che a causa dell’</span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>inerzia pubblica</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> vede </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procrastinarsi</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> oltre il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>normale</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> ed il </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>tollerabile</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> gli effetti di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>provvedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> (o di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>procedimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">) che </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>conculca le proprie facoltà di godimento</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> in quanto </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>proprietario</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di un </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>determinato bene</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">; il privato </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>ha già</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;">, ma </span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"><b>non può pienamente godere</b></span><span style="font-family: Arial Narrow, Arial Narrow, sans-serif;"> di quello che ha.</span></p> </li> </ol>
