The application of good faith’s principle to the activity of the public administration, intended both as contractual and procedural, is currently undeniable, however the limits and modalities through which this principle is articulated are still the subject of doctrinal and jurisprudential debate, in particular as regards the institution of the pre-contractual liability of the public administration
This latter institute is the subject of a specific analysis, which will attempt to investigate the main crucial points of the debate: the protection of the legitimate expectations of the private individual during the negotiations established with the public administration, the legal nature of pre-contractual liability and more procedural issues, such as the division of jurisdiction between civil and administrative law judges.
In order then to fully understand the functions performed by the principle of good faith in the context of public activities, the research also concentrated on the different interpretations that legal scholars have today attributed to the judgment of good faith, understood both as a civil contractual principle and as a new constitutionally oriented administrative principle.
In the continuation of the dissertation, in fact, an attempt is made to evaluate the applicability of the judgment of good faith from an interdisciplinary, civil and administrative point of view, in order to demonstrate how this principle has slowly managed to pervade administrative matters as well, influencing in a sense guaranteed not only the jurisprudential dictum, but also the normative intervention of the legislator.