When in Rome: why commonhold works without leaseholders or freeholders
Part one: what England can learn from Italy’s Condominio system
In this three‑part series, partner and enfranchisement specialist Shabnam Ali-Khan and Italian law expert Jessica Zama discuss what needs to happen for commonhold to succeed in England, drawing on lessons from Italy’s long‑established Condominio system and other jurisdictions where commonhold‑style ownership is the default.
As England and Wales move closer to making commonhold the default tenure for flats, it is worth pausing to look beyond our own borders. Elsewhere in Europe, most notably in Italy, the leasehold/freeholder model simply does not exist. Apartments are owned outright, permanently, and collectively managed through a system that is neither novel nor fragile, but deeply embedded in law and practice.
In Italy, there is no conceptual or legal distinction between owning a house and owning a flat. When someone buys an apartment, they acquire full ownership of that unit together with a defined share of the building’s common parts. There is no landlord collecting ground rent, no reversionary interest, and no lease term that gradually ticks down. Ownership is indefinite by default.
One of the clearest lessons from jurisdictions like Italy is that flats don’t need weakening forms of ownership to function. Full, permanent ownership can coexist perfectly well with collective responsibility.
The Condominio as a legal and practical structure
Apartment buildings are organised as Condomini. While the Condominio is not a full legal person in the corporate sense, Italian law grants it substantial legal capacity. It can open bank accounts, enter into contracts, and bring or defend legal proceedings. This quasi‑entity status is not accidental; it reflects a long‑standing recognition that collective ownership needs a durable legal container.
That container is provided primarily by statute. Articles 1135 to 1142 of the Italian Civil Code govern the operation of condominiums in detail. They set out how decisions are made, how expenses are divided, what happens in cases of default, and which rights and obligations are inherent to ownership. Individual buildings also adopt their own Regulations, but these operate beneath, not in place of, statutory rules.
Flexibility within firm statutory boundaries
Certain matters are deliberately non‑derogable. The existence and ownership of common parts, minimum voting thresholds for key decisions, and the basic right of each owner to use shared areas without impeding others cannot be altered by local agreement. The result is a system that offers flexibility without sacrificing certainty.
Italian condominium law is deliberately prescriptive in its fundamentals. That isn’t a bug; it’s what gives owners, lenders and courts clarity about where the boundaries lie.
Costs, contributions and enforcement in practice
A central feature of the Condominio is the millesimi system. Each apartment’s share of the common property is expressed as a proportion out of a thousand, typically reflecting its size and characteristics. These millesimi determine both financial contributions and voting weight, and they are recorded transparently in the Regulations. From the moment of purchase, owners know precisely where they stand.
Expenses are divided into ordinary costs, such as heating, cleaning and routine maintenance, and extraordinary costs, including structural works or litigation. Importantly, the obligation to contribute is not treated as optional or moral, but legal. If an owner defaults, the Condominio has standing to pursue payment.
Italy’s model shows that commonhold ownership can and does work in other jurisdictions. Commonhold has been available here for over 20 years. The take up has been incredibly low. This is down to various factors including lack of awareness, lender scrutiny as well as the current onerous requirements to convert to commonhold (100% agreement of all parties including leaseholders, lenders and all landlords). The new Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill seeks to address some of the challenges. We can certainly learn from Italy. The lesson is not that commonhold is effortless, but that clarity, enforceability and shared expectations make collective ownership workable at scale.
If you would like to discuss commonhold reform, collective ownership structures, or the implications of the proposed framework for owners, developers, lenders or investors, please get in touch with Shabnam Ali‑Khan or Jessica Zama.
Get in touch with the residential property team
If you would like to speak with a member of the team you can contact our property law solicitors by telephone on +44 (0)20 3826 7519 or complete our enquiry form.
