TRIESTE: EUROPEAN HALT TO THE FRAUD OF THE “OLD PORT”
Analysis by Paolo G. Parovel
Trieste, 2 July 2026. – This February the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) declared unlawful the Italian provision of law that granted the promoter of a project financing procedure a pre-emption right (prelazione) in the public tender (including EU public tenders) for the award of concession contracts.
Under that provision (contained in Legislative Decree No. 50/2016, Art. 183, paragraph 15) the promoter would be awarded a contract even in the event that it was another candidate to submit the best proposal.
On 5 February 2026, with its Judgment in Case C-810/24, the CJEU ruled that such pre-emption right cannot be exercised, because it constitutes a breach of the principle of equal treatment, under which tenders are to be assessed in conditions of effective competition.
The question was referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union to the top Italian Administrative Court, the Council of State (Consiglio di Stato), seeking a preliminary ruling on whether the provisions of the Italian Public Procurement Code on the pre-emption right constitute a breach of relevant EU laws.
The Judgment of the CJEU is relevant also for Trieste, because it puts a stop to the attempt, initiated in August 2023 by Mayor Dipiazza, with Regional President Fedriga and the former President of the Port, D’Agostino, to impose the illegitimate urbanization of the so-called “old port” by awarding the project to real estate group Costim.
Indeed, the Italian pre-emption right, now invalidated by the CJEU, was necessary to prevent the European public tender from ultimately being awarded to another bidder.
It is understandable that Gruppo Costim is now in a difficult position, especially because it appears to have already spent more than two million Euro to plan the operation.
Also, by now, Gruppo Costim should have also realized that the operation in which it has been involved would remain constantly exposed to the risk of being halted by further legal challenges concerning breaches of international obligations.
In fact, it is no coincidence that the urbanization of the so-called “old port” has been promoted on the Italian and international real estate market for 10 years, yet has failed to attract any ordinary investor.
Because no one invests in a real estate project without first verifying all of the seller’s claims about the physical and legal status of the assets concerned.
With regard to Trieste, it is not difficult to ascertain that the area in question is not some “old port”; rather, it is one of the two permanent free zones of the international Free Port of Trieste, subject to the rights of all States, fully equipped, and capable of being fully reactivated for port operations at any time.
Indeed, it is the Northern Free Port, comprising piers and docks on the open sea, the Adriaterminal, storehouses, a railway yard connected to European railway as well as to the Southern Free Port, and water depths of 14 to 15 meters, as well as an approved project for the construction of a new logistics platform with seabeds reaching depths of up to 20 meters, identical to the Deep Sea Container Terminal of the Croatian port of Rijeka.
Consequently, that area’s economic and strategic value for its legitimate, permanent activities of international Free Port is infinitely superior to any of its possible real estate values.
Its attempted urbanization is therefore a massive real estate and construction fraud, and this is clear even before it can be confirmed through a few simple checks.
Those checks include examining satellite images of the area, consulting the public records available in the Land Registry Book (Libro Fondiario – Grundbuch), and reviewing the investigations and complaints published here in English and in Italian, which have attracted more than one million readers worldwide.
At this point, it also becomes evident that the claims made by the political, institutional, and media promoters of that real estate investment opportunity are not credible.
As no investors came forward, the Municipality could only carry out operations to partially take over the port area itself, and with partners to whom it represented, or led to believe, that it possessed a valid, undisputed, and unconditional ownership title over the area — a title which it does not in fact possess.
One such operation is the Mayor’s attempt to impose the construction of an urban cable car by launching a European public tender for a project that lacks both real financial cover and the required adjustments in the current Urban Development Plan (Piano Regolatore).
Furthermore, anyone can verify in public records how the aforementioned false representation of unconditional ownership has also been exploited by a consortium established by the Municipality, the Region, and the Port Authority to take over the remaining area through a project financing scheme with the involvement of Gruppo Costim.
This new project would also allow for the unrestricted sale of port areas and storehouses, as well as coastal concessions under the international Free Port regime, which would be especially appealing for State-owned enterprises of the People’s Republic of China.
In March 2024, D’Agostino suddenly resigned as President of the Port Authority concerned and left Trieste. Mayor Dipiazza and Regional President Fedriga both remain in office in Trieste, and should now begin providing clear public explanations regarding these real estate operations.
And Fedriga should do so first, because in 2014, as leader of the Lega parliamentary group he was the first to warn that the urbanization of the so-called “old port”, then forced by representatives of the Italian Democratic Party (Partito Democratico) with their Renzi Government, was, and remains, a speculative fraud in breach of international obligations.
This also means that those Italian Democratic Party politicians should provide an explanation for that illegal speculation, because so far they have continued to support it.
Equally requiring an explanation is the thoroughly documented fact that the continuation of this massive real estate and construction fraud has so far been made possible by decisions of local and central Italian administrative and judicial authorities whose legal obligation is to prevent it.
Furthermore, this abnormal conduct by public officials may give rise to forms of liability under Articles 40(2) and 479 of the Italian Criminal Code and Article 28 of the Italian Constitution.
It would therefore be appropriate for the competent Government authorities to carry out the necessary investigations before the fraud concerning Trieste’s “old port” becomes an international case in its own right.
Trieste | the Northern Free Port.