Post by account_disabled on Mar 5, 2024 1:33:01 GMT -5
The Supreme Court points out that in the regulation of the approval of planning instruments, care has always been taken to impose this requirement of citizen participation
The Contentious-Administrative Chamber, Section 5, of the Fax Lists Supreme Court, in ruling 869/2023, of June 26, declares that it is not mandatory that a prior citizen participation procedure be enabled in the preparation of planning instruments , in application of article 133 [1] of Law 39/2015 for the processing of the approval procedure of the general provisions.
The question of cassational interest raised in the present case is whether, for the approval of the territorial planning instruments , the state or even regional regulations specifically established for the approval of the regulations must be followed, given the regulatory nature of such instruments.
As the ruling explains, the trial court declared the nullity of the modification of the contested planning reasoning that, if the planning instruments are regulatory in nature, their approval must be subject to the special regulations of said general provisions, in which one of the procedures Of special relevance is that of citizen participation [2] .
The Supreme Court declares that “in the regulation of the approval of planning instruments, care has always been taken to impose this requirement of citizen participation as resulting from the Consolidated Text of the Law on Land Regime and Urban Planning, approved by Royal Legislative Decree 1/1992, of June 26, which dedicated an entire Chapter to the "preparation and approval of plans " (articles 101 to 124), said regulation being completed with the Planning Regulation , approved by Royal Decree 2159/1978, of June 23.”
The Contentious-Administrative Chamber, Section 5, of the Fax Lists Supreme Court, in ruling 869/2023, of June 26, declares that it is not mandatory that a prior citizen participation procedure be enabled in the preparation of planning instruments , in application of article 133 [1] of Law 39/2015 for the processing of the approval procedure of the general provisions.
The question of cassational interest raised in the present case is whether, for the approval of the territorial planning instruments , the state or even regional regulations specifically established for the approval of the regulations must be followed, given the regulatory nature of such instruments.
As the ruling explains, the trial court declared the nullity of the modification of the contested planning reasoning that, if the planning instruments are regulatory in nature, their approval must be subject to the special regulations of said general provisions, in which one of the procedures Of special relevance is that of citizen participation [2] .
The Supreme Court declares that “in the regulation of the approval of planning instruments, care has always been taken to impose this requirement of citizen participation as resulting from the Consolidated Text of the Law on Land Regime and Urban Planning, approved by Royal Legislative Decree 1/1992, of June 26, which dedicated an entire Chapter to the "preparation and approval of plans " (articles 101 to 124), said regulation being completed with the Planning Regulation , approved by Royal Decree 2159/1978, of June 23.”
