A setback for those opposing the new stadium project and a partial victory for Milan and Inter. The Lombardy Administrative Court (TAR) rejected an appeal filed by a group of citizens and committees against the restriction placed on the second tier of the Meazza Stadium, marking an important step forward for the future plans at San Siro. The decision was made in a ruling in which the administrative judges declared that “based on a preliminary assessment typical of this phase", revealed no evidence that would lead to a beneficial outcome for the appellants. The appeal, submitted by 82 people and three committees, was directed at the City of Milan, the Ministry of Culture, and the Ministry of Infrastructure, and sought to overturn a number of public acts. These included the resolutions regarding the stadium purchase tender, the agreement with Bocconi University and the Polytechnic University of Milan, and the Superintendency's opinion that November 10, 2025, could be the potential date for the restriction to be implemented on the second tier. On the merits, the judges expressed skepticism regarding the appeal's admissibility, emphasizing the "absolute uncertainty" surrounding the identity of the signatories and the absence of concrete evidence to accurately identify them. Nevertheless, the primary concern is the legitimacy of the Superintendency's assessment, which, as per the TAR, is entirely within the technical discretion of the authority responsible for the preservation of cultural heritage. This discretion, according to the ruling, may only be called into question in exceptional circumstances, such as when it is clearly illogical, inconsistent, or tainted by evident errors. In this case, the Superintendence chose November 10, 1955—the date when the provisional acceptance report certifying completion of work on the second tier was drawn up—as the reference date for the restriction. According to the TAR, this choice appears neither unreasonable nor unwarranted, hence the appeal is denied. Additionally, the appellants' claim of urgency for suspending the proceedings—the "periculum in mora"—was also found to be inconsistent. The judges have determined that the anticipated execution of the stadium sales contract does not constitute irreparable harm. Especially since, as stated in the documents, the Meazza's prospective demolition cannot occur before 2030.