With the first reason of violation and false application, the applicant regrets that the Territorial Court intended to link directly the requirement of appearance not so much to the means or works through which servitude is exercised, but the existence of some property or condominium installations which, moreover, would not be directly visible, would not be on the fund encumbered by servitude and would not constitute the object of the right of servitude, to which they would link via merely possible. For all the legal matters of the same a visit to https://www.atlantadreamliving.com/ happens to be quite important.
The Options after
The Court of Appeal also did not consider that, for the three or at most four annual supplies of diesel fuel which, moreover, would no longer be needed now, it was absolutely not necessary for the tanker to enter private property, forcing the removal of the machinery and vehicles deposited there, since the discharge of diesel fuel could very well be carried out, as has happened several times, with the tanker parked on the public road and the fuel pipe connected to the mouth of the tank. The contested sentence could have recognized only the right of the Condominium, pursuant to law to access, through the fund owned by the applicant, to the thermal power plant owned by the condominium for any extraordinary and contingent need and to exercise this possible access through the stairwell of number 59, that is, through the easiest and shortest route.
- The second submission denounces contradictory motivation about a decisive point of the controversy since the sentence recognizes the requirement of the appearance of the easement of step based on the wrong location of some property and condominium facilities in the property of the S. On one hand, the applicant claims that the autoclave room and the lifting system would not be accessed from the ramp and the courtyard owned by S., but only through the stairwell of number n. 59. on the other hand, that the cistern buried in the square behind the property owned by S which contained the diesel fuel that then fed the central heating system of the building could be accessed not only through the ramp but also from the two stairwells of the building.
The third submission contradictory motivation about a decisive point of the controversy criticizes that the Territorial Court did not consider the ten-year protraction of access through the ramp to be a mere act of tolerance in favor of condominiums, allowed, for reasons of courtesy, easy refueling of the boiler room.
Conclusion
The three reasons which, given their close connection, can be examined together are unfounded.
With logical and motivated appreciation of the results of the case, the District Court in confirming the decision of the first judge ascertained:
That the building which then split it into several real estate units, sold separately, thus giving rise to the condominium was equipped with a series of systems common to all portions of the building thermal power plant, autoclave and sewage lifting plant, located in the subsoil.
