The Regional Administrative Tribunal for Liguria, with a judgment published yesterday, has again rejected the appeal of the Great Fast Vessels (GNV) against the Port System Authority of the Western Ligurian Sea and against the port company Genovese Company Single Freight Workers Various Paride Batini (CULMV) with which the the shipping company intended to confirm the possibility of carrying out in the port of Genoa the operations of rizzling and deriding of heavy vehicles and trailers on board of its own ships in self-production, namely employing its own staff instead of resorting to the workers of the port company.

In the judgment, the Tar recalls that, "by intending to provide for the above-mentioned operations by means of the on-board personnel (" self-production ") , GNV had asked the Port System Authority of the West Ligurian Sea-Genoa (hereinafter referred to as "System Authority"), with note of November 30, 2018, the release of specific ex-art authorization. 16, Law no. 84/1994. The appeal against the acts with which the Authority had found negatively said has been declared in part inadmissible and in part inadmissible with the judgment of Section no. 808 of September 27, 2021. It is still pending the appeal judgment promoted by GNV. " The Tar recalls, moreover, that "in the blackberries, the Capitaneria di Oorto di Genova had reported to the System Authority, with note of October 16, 2020, that a limited portion of the cargo revamp operations on the ship" GNV Fantastic " would be carried out by crew members who had assisted the personnel of the authorized port company CULMV. The System Authority had said it said the workers used in the case by GNV, as clarified by the company itself, did not understand the crew members. Thus, with a note of January 14, 2021, GNV signaled to the System Authority that the port operations authorised in extension for the current year would be carried out by the dependent personnel listed in the organizational charts already presented, possibly supplemented by workers of the CULMV. "Maritime personnel cannot carry out port operations" because under current regulations, self-production is allowed "only in case," the authority said in a statement. that in the port concerned there are no necessary equipment or maestances " ; as a result, the port and rotable port handling operations require "the exclusive use of land personnel" of GNV and may not be carried out by members of crews ".

" The main appeal proposed by GNV has for its object the statement of February 10, 2021, with which the System of the System, which has a prior communication of the same undertaking, reminded them that, under the terms of the paragraph, 4-bis of art. 16 of the Law no. 84 of 1994, "maritime personnel may not carry out port operations" : considering that GNV is holder of authorisation for the handling of goods and rotatable in the port of Genova, the System Authority has remarked that such operations do not may be carried out by the members of crews and has requested that, for the purpose of enrollment in the appropriate registers, the list of the ground personnel being held for the same purposes was produced. According to the applicant's prospecting, the contested note would have a nature of a timely measure which, by amending the guidance assumed until that time by the System Authority, precludes the possibility of using the board staff in the conduct of the revings and deriding of vehicles and trailers on the ships that do stopover in the port of Genoa. "

"The thesis of the recurring part cannot be shared," Tar said. As its literal content clearly reveals, in fact, the note in question does not place any new command or ban on the firm or imposes any obligation to do whose default may result in the suspension or revocation. of the authorisation, but merely to remind the modalities that, in the light of the current regulations, must be applied for the proper conduct of port operations, i.e. through the use of ground staff and without involvement of the members of crews. Therefore, as correctly noted by the State's Avvocation, a purely reconnaissance act of the legislative provisions regulating the subject matter and obligations that result, as such not autonomously lesive of the sphere legal of the appellant. Moreover, it was not apparent that GNV had asked to be able to use on-board personnel in the conduct of port operations nor to employ it at certain stages of the rizzing and deriding activities, the contested note does not even configure negative feedback to an instance of the private. The application for renewal of the permit submitted by GNV on July 2, 2019, in fact, contained the following organizational chart of employees : 1 responsible terminal, 2 port coordination team, 3 capiturn, 3 technical assistants of apron, 6 coordinators, 18 polyvalent placers-rizzlers and 11 polyvalent tractorists. Having not indicated maritime personnel, the appellant cannot complain that the System Authority has imposed on them to use only ground personnel for the conduct of port operations. "

" For completeness-it still clarifies the latest judgment of the Tar-it takes into account the fact that it is not worthy of sharing the thesis that, in light of the judgment of the Court of Justice, no matter. 179 of 1991 (proceedings C-179/90), the art. 16, paragraph 4-bis, of Law no. 84/1994, should be disapplied in contrast to the European Union law. The aforementioned pronunciation, in fact, has established the incompatibility with the EEC Treaty of Italian Standards (artt. 110 and 11 cod. nav.) that reserved the carrying out of port operations to the companies or groups and imposed on dealers to avail themselves exclusively, for the execution of such transactions, of the maesties constituted in the companies or groups. The novellate art. 16 provides that port operations may be carried out under self-production in cases where it is not possible to resort to authorised undertakings or agencies or agencies for the provision of temporary port work, provided that they are respected the additional conditions laid down therein with regard to the allocation of mechanical and personnel means. This is, in evidence, of non-equaliable forecasts as the new discipline, while also allowing the conduct of operations to entities other than the port companies or in the scheme of self-production, does not result in a dominant position untouchable to be scaled up by potential competition. "

In the judgment, it is also recalled that GNV argued " that the provision referred to in the most times cited 4-bis could not find application in the present case, since it is not controversial in order to have recourse to self-production by a shipping company, but rather to the manner of carrying out of the port operations by an authorised ex-art firm. 16, Law no. 84/1994. In fact, it is noted that, in the statement submitted in respect of the application for renewal of the authorisation for the year 2023 (doc. n. 24 of the recurring part), GNV specified that the port operations would be carried out by 48 units so subdivided : 1 responsible terminal, 2 port coordination team, 3 shift chiefs, 7 coordinators, 26 polyvalent placers-risers and 9 polyvalent tractorists. It was, in this case, too, of staff who were involved in the terminal of which the applicant has. Instead, the annex list of personnel operating in the port area of Genoa contained 58 nominations, 9 of them corresponding to units of maritime personnel with rizzing duties or recreational support. It may be considered, as a result, that the authorisation relating to 2023 is detrimental to the applicant's interests in the part in which it establishes that " according to the current regulations, it is not admissible to appeal to self-production by the shipowner companies, save specific authorisation and pre-emptive investigation " (Art. 3, the fourth paragraph) : this judgment, in fact, implies denial to use in the port operations of recollection and deriding of the 9 units of maritime personnel indicated, albeit in a misleading manner, in the application for renewal submitted by the recurrent. This premise-underlines the judgment-the censorship is manifestly unfounded as the partial denial constitutes a pious application of art. 16, paragraph 4-bis, of Law no. 84/1994, which, as has already been stated, allows for the conduct of the port operations in self-production only in the presence of certain conditions that do not occur peacefully in the present case. By making express reference to the operations in self-production carried out by the vessel, of the rest, the mentioned ostentatious prediction to the use of board personnel is peacefully applicable even in the event that such personnel are placed at dependencies of the enterprise operating in the terminal. Contrary to opining, it would be easy to circumvent the application of a rule responsive to priority security reasons that do not change in the event that resorting to self-production is propelled by an authorized undertaking ex art. 16 cit. ".