Condominium assembly majorities in Italy: article 1136 explained

In June the assembly approves the facade renovation: show of hands, majority of those present, minutes closed in ten minutes. In February a court voids the whole thing: the yes votes carried only 410 millesimi, and for extraordinary works of that scale Italian law demands at least 500. Scaffolding cancelled, quotes expired, and the building starts over, another meeting, another year lost. Condominium assembly majorities in Italy run on a double track, heads and millesimi, and they change depending on what is being voted. The general rule, set by article 1136 of the Italian Civil Code, is softer than most owners think: at second call, a resolution passes with one third of the building's value plus a majority of those attending. The trouble lies in the exceptions: that is where resolutions break.

What is the difference between constitutive and voting quorum?

The constitutive quorum determines whether the assembly can start working at all; the voting quorum determines whether each individual resolution is valid. They are two separate checks, made at different moments: the first once, when the meeting opens; the second item by item, because the room changes, someone arrives at point two of the agenda, someone else leaves before point four.

At first call, the assembly is validly constituted only if the owners present represent two thirds of the building's value and a majority of all the condominium's participants. To pass a resolution you then need a majority of those attending plus at least half the building's value, meaning 500 millesimi.

Those are steep numbers, rarely reached in an ordinary building.

That is why the first call almost always fails and the real life of an Italian condominium happens at the second one.

What quorum applies at second call?

The second call must be held on a later day, and in any case within ten days of the first. Here the bar drops: to constitute the assembly, one third of the participants representing at least one third of the building's value is enough; to pass a resolution, a majority of those attending whose votes carry at least one third of the value, 333.33 millesimi.

This threshold covers ordinary management: approving the budget and the annual accounts, allocating expenses under the legal criteria, routine maintenance, rules on the use of common parts. If twelve owners out of thirty show up and seven yes votes add up to more than 334 millesimi, the resolution stands.

Legal note: a resolution passed with an insufficient majority is not automatically void but voidable, and must be challenged within thirty days under article 1137 of the Civil Code. The same goes for a resolution taken when even one person entitled to attend was not properly summoned: article 66 of the implementing provisions makes it voidable at the request of the owner who was left out, again within thirty days.

How many millesimi do extraordinary works require?

For a set of matters the legislator does not trust the reduced threshold: the fourth paragraph of article 1136 always requires a majority of those attending plus at least 500 millesimi, even at second call. This is the majority needed for:

• extraordinary repairs of considerable scale and the reconstruction of the building
• appointing and removing the administrator
• litigation on matters beyond the administrator's ordinary powers
• installing video surveillance systems on the common parts

Watch out for the notion of "considerable scale": the law sets no figure, and courts weigh the cost of the works against the economic size of the building. A tip from someone who has watched resolutions collapse: before putting a major contract to a vote, compare the expense with the annual budget, if it exceeds or approaches it, treat the vote as extraordinary works of considerable scale and go hunting for 500 millesimi, not 334.

When are two thirds or unanimity required?

One step up sit the innovations, works that change the purpose or use of common property: turning the courtyard into parking, installing a pool, enclosing the portico. These require a majority of those attending plus at least two thirds of the building's value, 666.67 millesimi. So-called facilitated innovations are the exception: removing architectural barriers, energy-saving works and parking facilities pass with 500 millesimi.

Unanimity remains necessary when the decision leaves the field of management and touches individual property rights:

• selling or otherwise disposing of common parts, such as the concierge's lodge or the roof terrace
• departing from the legal expense-allocation criteria of article 1123 of the Civil Code
• revising the millesimal tables, except in cases of error or changed conditions of the building, where a majority of attendees plus 500 millesimi suffices

Off the scale altogether sit the innovations banned by the fourth paragraph of article 1120: those that compromise the stability or safety of the building, alter its architectural character, or make a common part unusable or unenjoyable for even a single owner. No majority reaches them: no assembly resolution can authorise them.

How are heads and millesimi counted together?

Every majority in article 1136 is a double one: you count people and, in parallel, their millesimi from the building's table. Each owner counts as one head regardless of their share; co-owners of the same flat count as a single head and vote through one representative. Proxies accumulate in the hands of the proxy holder, within the limits set by article 67 of the implementing provisions.

Abstentions are where most minutes get stuck: under the prevailing view they count among those attending, so they raise the denominator and, in practice, weigh like no votes. Whoever keeps the minutes should record, for every vote, each owner's name, millesimi and choice. Minutes that settle everything with "approved by majority of those present" are the first to fall in court, because they make it impossible to verify whether the double threshold was actually met.

The working rule is simple: before opening any vote, ask what exactly is being voted on and find its specific threshold, not the generic one. A resolution passed with the wrong majority is not a formality problem: it is a decision living with an expiry date, and anyone who voted against it has thirty days to bring it down.

Updated 29 July 2026. Specific to Italy under the Italian Civil Code. This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.