In this short article I address the subject of the "minimum condominium" — a topic unknown to most, even to some of my colleagues.
Let us define the matter in simple terms using a case I actually handled: a single detached house of two floors. The ground floor owned by Tom. The first floor owned by Dick.
The house has a lovely landscaped garden, with a low boundary wall and railing all around, a nice automated driveway gate and a pedestrian gate.
Both floors open onto a small courtyard, a gravelled yard where there is an outbuilding — a prefabricated steel structure with a canopy — used to shelter the cars, scooters and bicycles of the co-owners and their respective family members. Tom and Dick — but in particular the wives of the two co-owners — asked me which of the two should bear the costs of redoing the roof, and which of the two should pay for garden maintenance and for tidying up the gravel in the courtyard.
Both firmly maintained — believe me — positions that had nothing to do with the law, but were instead based on widespread beliefs founded on how the garden was used and on the fact that the roof only covered the first floor.
So Dick argued that all costs relating to maintenance of the ground floor (garden, driveway gate, courtyard, boundary wall and railing) should be paid by Tom, while Tom in turn argued that the roof should be Dick's responsibility alone.
I therefore want to set the record straight. The property described above is a textbook example of a "minimum condominium" under Art. 1117-bis of the Italian Civil Code. This "discovery", I confess, literally shook Dick's wife, prompting her to step out of my office for some air. But setting aside the effect of my advice on the spirits of the protagonists of our story, let us address the matter in a few steps.
Recall that a condominium is defined as a building with two or more real-estate units belonging to different people. The existence of a condominium therefore means that the assets listed under Art. 1117 of the Civil Code — and more generally those that serve to support the enjoyment of the individually owned units — must be considered condominium (common) property.
For example, the paths leading to the private garden, the ramp giving access to the garage, the driveway gate, etc. In summary, all parts of the building necessary for common use are common and/or condominium property, such as the land on which the building stands, the foundations, load-bearing walls, pillars and beams, roofs and flat roof terraces, staircases, entrance doors, vestibules, porches, courtyards and façades. The only exceptions occur when such assets do not serve that purpose, or when the first conveyance deed (i.e. the notarial deed) from which the condominium's existence can be traced has excluded or limited their common-property status.
An example of this is precisely the attic, which under Art. 1117 of the Civil Code is considered common property only if it is intended, "by its structural and functional features, for common use". In our specific case, however, Dick has the ability to use the attic exclusively, having converted a space into a room for his children and having also built a bathroom there; it is therefore clear that the attic cannot be considered a common part.
The situation regarding the roof is different: unless the purchase deeds state otherwise, it must certainly be considered condominium property, given that its function is to enclose the entire building — whether it is a two-family house or a building with several units — and not merely to cover the first floor.
It follows that our Tom and Dick must both contribute to the management and maintenance costs, not only of the roof but also of all the other common parts: hence to the maintenance of the (common) garden, of the boundary wall and railing, of the driveway gate and pedestrian gate, as well as of the courtyard and the outbuilding used to shelter the cars.
"Having good neighbours is like having a bigger house." — Chinese proverb
In closing this very brief contribution, I will simply quote this Chinese proverb — in consideration of the fact that for some years many Chinese families have been living and working among us — as a testament to the great wisdom and millennia-old culture of the East.