Over time, various legislative mechanisms have been introduced to address this issue. Among them is Article 2-bis of Law No. 241/1990, which provides a right to compensation where an authority fails to conclude a procedure within the prescribed period.

However, the mere fact of delay does not automatically give rise to a compensable loss. Article 2-bis requires proof that the administration’s inertia was culpable, and the burden of establishing this element rests entirely on the claimant.

Accordingly, where an authority delays the adoption of a favourable administrative measure, the claimant must demonstrate every constituent element of the compensation claim. The court must assess both the objective requirements (the unlawfulness of the failure to act, the existence of unjust damage deserving of redress, and the causal link between the omission and the harm) and the subjective element (intent or negligence on the part of the administration).

In a recent decision—TAR Lazio, judgment No. 16757/2025—the court rejected a claim for damages arising from the failure to decide on a request to extend a concession. The court held that, under Article 2-bis, compensation for delay requires proof of culpable inertia; the mere breach of the statutory time limit for concluding the procedure is not enough.

For further reference:
TAR Lazio, Judgment No. 16757/2025; Article 2-bis, Law 241/1990.

The economic operator ranked second therefore submitted a request for access to the documents, arguing that under Article 36 of Legislative Decree 36/2023 the contracting authority is required to publish any decisions adopted in response to requests for redaction.
The Administration replied by releasing the technical offer in a fully redacted form. The operator then lodged an appeal which was declared out of time, for the reasons set out below.

Grounds of the decision
The judges held that Article 36(3) requires the contracting authority, when notifying the award, to state any decisions taken regarding requests to redact parts of the tenders. Such decisions must be challenged within the strict ten-day limitation period running from the date of the award, as set out in paragraph 4.

However, where the contracting authority fails to publish a specific decision on redaction, the award notification itself must be considered an implicit indication of the authority’s decision to withhold the technical offer. This is because the notification is the moment at which competitors are placed in a position to understand which documents the authority intends to disclose and which it intends to withhold from access or publication.

Consequently, the appeal was deemed late, having been filed and served more than ten days after the award notification.

For further reference:
TAR Campania, Naples, judgment no. 3951/2025; Articles 35 and 36, Legislative Decree 36/2023.

This is not just a symbolic garden, but a tangible space of hope: delicate white ceramic flowers with engraved petals carry words and thoughts – intimate messages and wishes that transform the fragility of illness into new energy for life.

The initiative highlights an innovative approach to healthcare: alongside advanced medical technology, the therapeutic journey is enriched by creative activities that support emotional wellbeing and social connection. As institutions at the event noted, combining clinical precision with artistic and playful experiences represents a path towards a more human-centred model of care, offering comfort during the most challenging times. The project is proof of how healthcare, volunteer organisations and businesses can collaborate to make a real difference in patients’ quality of life.

Verlingue proudly supported the creation of this artwork, reaffirming its commitment to initiatives that combine social responsibility with community value. Backing “Fiorisce un Giardino” means contributing not only to treatment, but also to the cultivation of beauty and courage – qualities that can inspire everyone who encounters them.

Ultimately, “Fiorisce un Giardino” is a garden of the soul: a place where illness meets creativity and is transformed into a sign of renewal. Every ceramic flower tells a story, a gesture that transcends pain and becomes a shared legacy, reminding us that even in the most difficult moments, it is possible to nurture hope and a vision of the future.

Scope of jurisdiction
The Ombudsman has jurisdiction over all disputes arising from insurance contracts, including matters relating to the recognition of rights (including compensation), obligations, and entitlements linked to insurance services and coverage.
Notably, cases concerning claims handled by the Road Victims Guarantee Fund or the Hunting Accident Guarantee Fund, as well as those falling within the remit of CONSAP (the Italian Public Insurance Services Concessionaire), are expressly excluded.

How the procedure works
The arbitration procedure may be initiated directly by the policyholder or claimant, via an online platform, without the need for legal representation and with minimal cost.
Importantly, the process is integrated within the complaints-handling framework: submitting a complaint to the insurance company or intermediary is a mandatory prerequisite.

Only in the event of no response or an unsatisfactory reply, can the claimant escalate the matter to the Insurance Ombudsman. Once the complaint is admitted, the Ombudsman must issue a decision within 90 days, extendable by a further 90 days in particularly complex cases.

Legal weight and reputational implications
Although decisions issued by the Insurance Ombudsman are not legally binding, non-compliance by supervised entities will result in reputational consequences: IVASS will publish the name of the non-compliant company on its institutional website for a period of five years.

Operational Status
Despite the legislative framework now being in place, the Insurance Ombudsman is not yet operational. IVASS is currently expected to issue the relevant technical and procedural rules via a dedicated measure, which will be published on its official website.

Further reading:

·       Ministerial Decree No. 215/2024, Ministry for Business and Made in Italy

·       Articles 141 ff. of the Italian Consumer Code

·       Articles 187 ff. of the Italian Insurance Code