The ‘Meazza Scam’ rejected by the Regional Administrative Court. Appeals against San Siro fail and the new stadium can go ahead

The ‘Grande Funzione Urbana San Siro’ – the urban planning name for the project for the new stadium in Milan involving the (partial) demolition of the Meazza – can now go ahead. Meanwhile, the ‘Grande Fuffa’ appeals regarding San Siro have been definitively dismissed by the Lombardy Regional Administrative Court (TAR), which ruled that the class actions brought against the project were inadmissible on grounds of ‘vagueness and volatility’. The Lombardy Regional Administrative Court has, in fact, dismissed all six appeals – comprising 60 ‘grievances’ – which were consolidated into a single hearing. The decision, which had been awaited for months (the timeframe for commencing work is tight), primarily concerns the two clubs, Inter and Milan, and the City of Milan, which has agreed to the sale of the Meazza and the development sites surrounding the new stadium: had the appeals been upheld, the whole project would have been called into question.

Work can now begin by summer 2027. However, the Regional Administrative Court’s decision also raises other important considerations of a more general nature. Indeed, although ‘on the merits, the Regional Administrative Court has not approved or rejected the correctness of the local authority’s interpretation of the applicable regulatory framework, nor the legitimacy or otherwise of the administrative procedure’, as the Corriere is keen to point out, it is nevertheless clear that the rejection on the grounds of the ‘vagueness and inconsistency’ of the appeals indicates the blatant lack of substance in all the complaints: starting with the one long debated (including in political circles) regarding the restriction due to the plant’s age, as well as that concerning the timing of the tenders. Everything was carried out in accordance with the rules. Meanwhile, the actions of individual citizens and the ever-changing ‘committees’ are without merit. It is also interesting that the only ‘grievance’ on which the Regional Administrative Court (TAR) ruled on the merits – the one against the ‘fast-track’ procedures used to finalise the sale in time by September 2025 – was rejected. Although not directly linked, this case also sheds light on the ongoing criminal investigation, in which municipal officials and company advisers are accused of having ‘colluded’ to facilitate the process. The Regional Administrative Court saw nothing wrong with this. The public prosecutor’s office, who knows.