Decision of the week · 13 July 2026
Regional Administrative Court of Sicily, Catania, Third Chamber, judgments of 13 July 2026, nos. 2058, 2060, 2062 and 2063
Regional Administrative Court of Sicily, Catania, Third Chamber, judgments of 13 July 2026:
judgment No. 2058/2026 · judgment No. 2060/2026 · judgment No. 2062/2026 · judgment No. 2063/2026
Official documents published by the Italian administrative justice portal, freely accessible (in Italian).
In four judgments published on the same day, the Third Chamber of the Regional Administrative Court (TAR) of Catania ruled on the challenges brought against resolution no. 8 of 29 October 2025 of the Management Committee of the Port System Authority of the Eastern Sicilian Sea, approving the new Port Master Plan (PRP) of the Port of Catania. The outcome is remarkable: the Plan is partially null and void – not merely voidable – insofar as it plans areas that fell outside the Authority's territorial boundaries at the time of approval.
The new Plan was challenged by very different claimants: the owner of a bathing establishment affected by the Plan (judgment no. 2058), the company promoting a marina project at the root of the harbour breakwater (judgments nos. 2060 and 2062), and two environmental associations (judgment no. 2063). From different angles, all the challenges raised the same issue: the Plan approved in October 2025 also covers maritime state property that, at that time, did not belong to the Port Authority's district and was still administered by the state property offices of the Sicilian Region.
The Authority's boundaries were extended only by Presidential Decree of 19 June 2026, eight months after the Plan was approved. The Court draws a clear-cut conclusion: including in the Plan provisions concerning areas outside the boundaries in force at the time of approval means exercising a planning power the Authority did not hold. This is not relative lack of competence, which would make the act voidable, but absolute lack of competence – a lack of attribution: the sanction is nullity under Article 21-septies of Law 241/1990, albeit limited to the excess provisions.
A procedural point is also worth noting: the administrative judge, not being bound by the claimant's legal characterisation of the defects, may requalify the alleged lack of competence as nullity, provided the parties are heard and the substance of the claim is unaltered.
Having established partial nullity, the Court declared the substantive challenges to the planning choices for the out-of-boundary areas absorbed. The basis is Article 34(2) of the Code of Administrative Procedure, read in the light of Plenary Assembly ruling no. 5 of 2015 and, most recently, Plenary ruling no. 2 of 2026: in no case may the judge rule on administrative powers not yet exercised. Since the Authority did not yet validly hold planning power over those areas, any assessment on the merits will belong to the possible re-exercise of the power within the new boundaries set by the June 2026 decree.
Judgment no. 2063 offers a lesson on the so-called dual track of environmental standing: alongside the statutory standing of recognised associations, other associations must prove in concrete terms their representativeness, a stable link with the territory and the relevance of the interest they protect. The local WWF passed the test; the other claimant association did not. Judgment no. 2062, finally, declared inadmissible for lack of interest the claim brought by the party that had already obtained the same result through the additional grounds decided in judgment no. 2060: an interest already satisfied elsewhere cannot support a second claim.
In judgment no. 2060, the Court instead rejected the marina company's original claim against the negative conclusion of the conference of services on the project submitted in 2019: the procedure, in the Court's view, was conducted correctly and with the involvement of all the competent authorities. The battle over Catania's waterfront therefore remains open on both fronts: the Plan will have to be redrawn where null, and the private project has not passed administrative scrutiny.
Beyond the local significance of the case, which concerns the future of Catania's waterfront, the four judgments establish a principle of general reach: the territorial boundaries of planning competence are not a formality, and their breach produces the most serious defect an administrative act can have. For companies, concession holders and associations affected by a plan's provisions, verifying the competence requirement comes first, before any discussion of the merits.