Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 41kWORD 9k
10 June 2020
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 138
Fulvio Martusciello (PPE)
 Subject: Financial terms and conditions in motorway concession contracts

In 2006 the Commission launched infringement procedure No 2006/2419 against Italy on account of Decree law 262/2006 (as amended by Law No 286/2006). The decree law sought to redefine the entire legal framework for motorway concessions in Italy and was due to be applied to both future and existing concession contracts.

The procedure was only closed after the Italian authorities gave a formal undertaking enshrined in law (Law No 101/2008) that it would in future adhere to the ‘pacta sunt servanda’ principle and consequently, would not again change unilaterally the financial terms and conditions of existing motorway concession contracts (including ASPI’s).

DG GROW (at the time DG MARKT), including its then Commissioner, sent a significant number of letters to the Italian authorities urging them to change completely their approach: to establish a clear and long-term legal framework that would give investors confidence in the predictability and stability of Italy’s motorway regime; to adhere to the ‘pacta sunt servanda’ principle and consequently, not change again the financial terms and conditions in existing contracts.

In light of the above, can the Commission answer the following question:

What action will the Commission now take, given that the Italian Government has once again altered the concession contract retroactively and unilaterally through Article 35 of the Milleproroghe Decree?

Original language of question: IT
Last updated: 27 June 2020Legal notice - Privacy policy