Practical regulations
Managing assets shared with neighbouring buildings
It is common for two or more separate buildings to share a courtyard, an irrigation system, an access road, or a technical plant, without the buildings forming a single condominium. Italian law addresses this through article 1117 bis of the Civil Code, which extends condominium rules to assets shared across multiple buildings even when those buildings remain administratively distinct. Understanding when this framework applies, how shared costs are allocated, and who holds the power to pass resolutions is essential to avoid disputes between neighbouring properties that, while legally independent, depend on one another for essential services such as water, energy, or access.
When you are dealing with a multi-building condominium versus a simple co-ownership
A multi-building condominium, known in Italian law as supercondominio, exists when several buildings, each with its own condominium administration, share one or more common assets or services: an access driveway, a playground, a treatment plant, a central heating system. Article 1117 bis of the Civil Code clarified that condominium rules apply to these complexes too, closing a gap that had previously generated years of interpretative uncertainty.
This must be distinguished from a simple co-ownership of an asset among owners who do not belong to a structured condominium assembly, for example a well or a shared driveway owned jointly by two independent houses: in that case the general rules on co-ownership apply (articles 1100 and following of the Civil Code), not condominium rules, with different consequences for voting quorums and management procedures.
Getting the classification right is not a theoretical exercise: it changes the majorities required to pass resolutions, whether appointing an administrator is mandatory, and how decisions can be challenged.
How shared costs are allocated
The general criterion remains proportional shares (millesimi), but a multi-building condominium needs a dedicated table for the assets shared between buildings, separate from the internal shares of each individual building: courts have repeatedly confirmed that the internal shares of one building cannot be used to allocate costs concerning the entire complex, since doing so would distort the real weight of each property.
For plants and services with differentiated use, such as a parking area used only by some buildings or an irrigation system serving a limited zone, article 1123 of the Civil Code requires the criterion of actual use: owners who do not benefit from a service are not required to contribute to its costs, unless otherwise agreed.
In practice, a well managed multi-building condominium keeps separate tables for general expenses of the complex, expenses for partially used services, and any extraordinary expenses on shared assets such as resurfacing a private road or replacing a shared heating plant.
Who can vote and with what majorities
When the participating buildings exceed sixty total units, the law provides for an assembly of representatives: each building appoints its own representative to vote at meetings concerning shared assets, in place of direct participation by every owner. Below that threshold, all owners across the different buildings may participate directly.
Majorities still follow article 1136 of the Civil Code: ordinary maintenance measures require the majority of those present representing at least one third of the building's value, while more significant works require higher quorums.
A frequent mistake is convening a single, generic assembly for matters that concern only some buildings in the complex: resolutions on assets with limited use must be adopted only by the owners actually concerned, otherwise the resolution is flawed and can be challenged.
Practical administration: what actually matters
In the day to day management of a multi-building condominium, it is advisable to keep separate accounting for the shared assets from that of the individual buildings, with distinct statements that allow each administrator to report the relevant shares in their own financial statements.
A management platform such as AmministraPro allows administrators to configure dedicated proportional-share tables for the multi-building condominium, distinct from those of each participating building, and to automatically calculate allocations according to the actual use criterion where applicable, reducing the risk of manual errors that later generate disputes between buildings.
Frequently asked questions
Does a multi-building condominium need a dedicated administrator?
Not always. If the complex includes more than eight owners overall and the conditions of article 1129 of the Civil Code are met, appointing an administrator becomes mandatory, just as it is for a single building condominium. Nothing prevents owners from appointing one even below that threshold, in order to simplify the management of assets shared between buildings and avoid responsibility falling informally on a single owner.
How do you tell a multi-building condominium apart from a simple co-ownership?
A multi-building condominium presupposes that the shared assets serve several buildings organized as proper condominiums, each with its own assembly and its own internal shares. Simple co-ownership instead concerns an asset jointly owned by parties who do not belong to any condominium structure, such as a private access shared between just two independent houses. In that case, articles 1100 and following of the Civil Code on co-ownership apply, with leaner management rules and no obligation to follow condominium assembly formalities.
Can an owner who does not use a shared service between buildings refuse to pay for it?
Yes, if the service objectively benefits only part of the buildings, based on the actual use principle set out in article 1123 of the Civil Code. For example, if a shared parking area serves only two of the four buildings in the complex, the other two are not required to contribute to its maintenance costs. This differentiated allocation must however be formalized in a dedicated table, otherwise disputes over its practical application are likely.
Can resolutions concerning assets shared between buildings be challenged?
Yes, following the same procedure provided for ordinary condominium resolutions: an owner who was absent, dissenting, or abstaining can challenge the resolution within thirty days before the competent court, if they believe it was adopted in violation of the law or the condominium regulation. A common defect concerns precisely the convening of the meeting: if a resolution on an asset with limited use is adopted at an assembly that also involves owners not concerned by that asset, the resolution can be challenged for incorrect composition of the assembly.
Can management software simplify the accounting of a multi-building condominium?
Yes, significantly. Manually managing separate proportional-share tables for each building, differentiated actual-use criteria per service, and statements that need to be reported in each building's own financial statements exposes administrators to errors that are hard to spot later. A platform such as AmministraPro allows administrators to configure the structure of the multi-building condominium, link the participating buildings, and automatically generate allocations according to the established criteria, keeping every step traceable for the administrator and for individual owners.
Try AmministraPro
Accounting, thousandths-based cost splitting, meetings, communications and artificial intelligence in a single Italian software, compliant with UNI 10801 and GDPR.