Osservazioni su taluni orientamenti giurisprudenziali e dottrinali in tema di ritenzione agraria

The cases of retention in agricultural land relations, as provided for by Law no. 203/1982, gave rise to several interpretation issues. The most complex one, among others, was, also in view of strong practical implications, to ascertain whether the power of the tenant to refuse the return of the agricultural holding until their creditor’s claims are met implies a specific kind of protection.
With regard to these issues, experts have provided non-univocal interpretations. However, the proposed solutions were all basically founded on the fact that the good retained by the former tenant -creditor is an agricultural holding, that is a res frugifera (productive land) which fertility and productivity must be preserved during the transitory retention period.
The aim of this study is to identify and analyze the different solutions provided by doctrine and jurisprudence about the debated question of whether the right of retention referred to in Law no. 203 is different from norms contained in the codes; and, consequently, whether or not the former tenant, as the withholder, can continue to benefit from the agricultural holding and take possession of the its fruits; and , in that case, whether the tenant is required to pay the lease to the legitimate owner of the res (land).