Balconies renovation costs partition

Many Australians own homes in Italy, either because inhedited from a family member or relative, or because they have purchased.

Many of these homes are located in condominiums. Therefore, owners often are faced with face condominium-related issues, such as renovations or damages.

One of these issues concerns the partition of costs for balcony renovations.

Here is a recent ruling that clarified some aspects of the partition of costs for balcony safety.

The recent decision of the Salerno Court of Appeal – Ruling No. 924 of November 1, 2025 – represents an important clarification in terms of condominium rules and regulations: it concerns the partition of costs for securing balconies and unsafe façade elements, and clearly defines who should pay those costs.

This issue is of great importance in condominium practice, especially given the growing number of urgent interventions for reasons of safety and decorum of the building.

The ruling provides important clarification on the role of the "safety" purpose in allocating expenses between condominium owners.

The Facts

A condominium made a decision to remove the balcony fronts —that is, the removal of "at-risk" plaster, concrete, fronts, and cornices— on the grounds of the need to secure the facade and protruding exterior parts.

Some condominium owners, owners of units without balconies, contested the resolution, arguing that, since they did not have balconies and the work involved exclusively owned elements (balconies), they should not be included in the costs.

The Decision

The Court of Appeal rejected the condominium owners' appeal and confirmed that: The costs necessary for the removal of unsafe elements (plaster, concrete, fronts, cornices) fall within the obligations to maintain the condominium's common areas, pursuant to Article 1130 of the Italian Civil Code.

Even if these elements are located on structures that appear to be exclusively owned (such as balconies overlooking individual units), if the intervention is aimed at ensuring the safety of the façade and protruding parts "at risk," the expense must be shared among all condominium owners.

In particular, balcony fronts that contribute to the architectural decoration of the façade can be classified as a common part pursuant to Article 1117 of the Italian Civil Code, citing legal guidelines, including rulings by the Court of Cassation.

Importance and Consequences

This ruling has several practical implications for condominium administrators and the condominium owners themselves:

- Safety = condominium nature: when renovation is justified by either emergency or danger to the structure or by safety (falling parts, detachment of fronts, etc.), the destination of the intervention would change the nature of the expense from exclusive maintenance borne by the individual to maintenance of the common areas.

- Distribution among all: even those who do not own a balcony or who appear not to be "directly" affected by the balcony in question, may be required to contribute to the costs if the element functions as part of the facade or common structure.

- Role of the administrator: it is the condominium administrator's responsibility to supervise the common areas (Article 1130 of the Civil Code) and promote the necessary interventions to avoid danger, also anticipating that such expenses are communal in nature.

- Thousandths table: the distribution is based on ownership shares (so called "thousandths table"), not on whether or not a single unit has a balcony.

Critical issues and operational suggestions

- It is important that the condominium meeting and the administrator bring clear evidence of the nature of the intervention: not just ordinary maintenance, but urgent safety measures.

- Dissenting condominium owners may object on the grounds of an exclusive balcony and claim that the expense is "extraordinary" only for those who own a balcony; The ruling, however, points out that this is not enough if the work affects the common structure.

- A special fund or a resolution specifying the urgency and purpose of the work may be provided.

- The condominium regulations must be checked to avoid disputes regarding the legitimacy of the division and the proper meeting call.

Conclusion

Ruling no. 924/2025 of the Court of Appeal of Salerno represents a strong reminder of the priority of structural safety and the preservation of common areas in condominiums, even when the element would ordinarily appear to be linked to an exclusive unit (the balcony).

By virtue of this orientation, the burden of safety would fall on the entire condominium, regardless of whether some owners do not own a balcony or use one directly.