Use of common property under article 1102 of the Italian Civil Code

The use of common property under article 1102 of the Italian Civil Code is the pivot of most condominium disputes: from the storage box cluttering the entrance hall to the air conditioner fixed to the facade, almost every conflict between neighbours turns on how much an individual may make use of what belongs to everyone. The rule is short but dense and sets out a general principle valid for both co-ownership and condominium. Understanding its logic helps the administrator to distinguish lawful uses from those that genuinely harm the rights of others.

What article 1102 says on the use of common property

Article 1102 provides that each participant may make use of the common property, provided this does not alter its destination and does not prevent the other participants from using it equally according to their right. The rule adds that a participant cannot extend their right over the common property to the detriment of others unless they carry out acts capable of changing the title of their possession. In essence, use is free, but it meets two impassable limits: the destination of the property and the equal use of others.

The first limit: not altering the destination

The first limit concerns the economic and material function of the common property. A courtyard intended for passage and light cannot be turned into the permanent parking space of a single owner, just as a common attic cannot become a private storeroom. The original destination is not changed by more intensive use but by a change of function, and to alter it permanently the consent of all participants is required, because it affects the right of each of them over the property.

The second limit: the equal use of others

The second limit is equal use. Case law is consistent in clarifying that equal use does not mean identical and simultaneous use: each owner may draw the most intense benefit from the common property, provided this does not deprive others of the possibility of using it according to their own right. To demand a perfectly equal and simultaneous use for everyone would end up blocking any particular use. The boundary is therefore elastic and must be assessed case by case, looking at the concrete impact on the use by others.

More intensive use is lawful

From these principles it follows that more intensive use of the common property is in itself permitted. An owner who, for example, attaches a pipe to the common wall or uses the landing more frequently commits no abuse, so long as they do not alter the destination and do not prevent equal use by others. The fact that other owners do not draw the same benefit does not make the use unlawful: equality of right does not require equality of actual use.

Recurring practical cases

Typically lawful uses include installing a sign or a flue on the common wall, opening a passage to connect the exclusive property to the common part, or resting installations on it, provided they are contained and reversible. Problematic instead are the exclusive and permanent occupation of a common portion, an encumbrance that permanently takes space away from others, or an installation that compromises decorum and safety. The difference always lies in the two limits of the article.

There is also a profile that article 1102 expressly recalls: a participant cannot extend their right over the common property to the detriment of others unless they carry out acts capable of changing the title of their possession. A use, even one prolonged over time, remains such as long as it occurs by the tolerance of the other owners; it becomes relevant instead as possession useful for a possible acquisitive prescription only if the owner unequivocally shows the intention to possess exclusively. The distinction matters because it marks the boundary between more intensive use and outright appropriation.

What the administrator can do

The administrator oversees the common parts and must intervene when an individual use exceeds the limits of the law. They can formally warn the owner, report to the meeting and, if necessary, act to remove the abuse. The condominium regulations may govern in detail how the common parts are used, but cannot completely compress the right of use recognised by article 1102, unless it is a contractual regulation accepted by everyone.

• Check whether the use changes the destination of the common property.
• Assess whether the use prevents equal use by others according to their right.
• Distinguish more intensive use, which is lawful, from exclusive occupation, which is forbidden.
• Consult the regulations for any specific contractual limits.

Managing the use of common parts with software

Condominium management software helps to keep a record of authorisations to use the common parts, of the warnings sent and of the related meeting resolutions, so that every action on individual use stays documented and consistent over time. Having an orderly history reduces conflicts and strengthens the condominium's position in any dispute.

AmministraPro keeps regulations, resolutions and communications relating to the common parts in a single archive, with a trace of every authorisation or warning. You can see how it works on the features page or compare the plans in the pricing section.