Cagliari, they have occupied the Sa Scafa roadhouse for 36 years: two 70-year-olds now risk forced eviction.
The retired couple's appeal against the ANAS decision was rejected. Their advanced age and renovations weren't enough: the two long-time occupants were forced out.Per restare aggiornato entra nel nostro canale Whatsapp
They have lived in a roadhouse in Sa Scafa for 36 years. Over time, they have cared for and renovated it. But they have never received any type of authorization. And so today, two elderly people, aged 74 and 72, risk forced eviction and losing the place where they have spent their lives . This is the human story at the heart of the ruling by the Sardinian Regional Administrative Court, which rejected the appeal filed by two occupants against the order by which Anas (National Roads Authority) had ordered the release of an old roadhouse on Via dei Calafati , in the area of the road that once served as the main road to State Road 195.
The Regional Administrative Court (TAR) upheld the legitimacy of the ANAS eviction order , which required the two elderly people to vacate the home within 30 days. The couple had lived in the property for over 36 years and claimed to have renovated it over time, making it habitable and maintaining it in good condition.
On April 15, the judges temporarily suspended the eviction, considering the applicants' age, their health, and the fact that it was their only residence . However, in a ruling published on October 14, the Regional Administrative Court rejected the appeal, recognizing Anas' right to recover the property.
At the heart of the dispute was the legal status of the old roadhouse on Via dei Calafati, in the area of the road that once served as the main road to State Road 195. According to the Regional Administrative Court (TAR), these buildings remain state property until formally excluded from the public domain . The transformation of Anas into a joint-stock company, therefore, did not remove its powers to recover them in the event of unauthorized occupation.
The judges also ruled out the possibility that the decades spent in the home and the work carried out could allow the couple to acquire ownership by adverse possession. The objections regarding the failure to notify the initiation of the proceedings and the lack of information regarding the property's future use were also rejected: the Court held that once unauthorized occupation had been established, Anas had a duty to recover the property .
Regarding the 30-day deadline granted to leave the house, the TAR considered that it was not, in itself, disproportionate, also in light of the time that had passed since the precautionary suspension of the measure.
The decision thus closes, at least in the first instance, a case involving two elderly and frail individuals, for whom that property represents their only housing option . The legal costs were shared between the parties, given the unique nature of the case.
"We will appeal to the Council of State," announced Francesco Scifo , the lawyer for the two elderly people. "One of my clients is in precarious health, and the property has been kept in good condition. In other cases, after evictions, the properties were left in a state of abandonment."