Point of law: whether the envisaged value of the necessary conservation works to be carried out on an archeological site shall constitute a real damage, or it is merely hypothetical and therefore cannot be regarded as damage and, consequently, is not subject to compensation.

Alternative views: 1) the value of the future conservation works is hypothetical, it may not be regarded as a harm and does not constitute a real damage in legal terms; or 2) the effectuation of such works is admissible only in the presence of appropriate permissions and project documentation, and therefore their value may be reimbursed only upon their effectuation and confirmation by the primary documents of the costs incurred; or 3) the compensation of the value of such works is possible and it by no means depend on the moments of approval of the project documentation and of the commencement of works.

Ratio decidendi: the Presidium found the third view to be legally correct.

Practical consequences: the Judgment says that prior court decisions in analogous cases if inconsistent with this interpretation may be reversed in the procedure and within the limits envisaged by Art 311 of the Commercial Procedure Code.