Fibre reaches an apartment building’s entrance, but installation stops over a disagreement: who authorises the cables, where will holes be drilled, and who repairs any damage? Greece’s Gigabit infrastructure bill addresses these everyday questions. The essential qualification is that, on 10 October 2026, it remains a draft under public consultation, while the EU Regulation already applies according to its own timetable.

The useful approach is to distinguish shared space, private property, the proposed works and whether a rule is enacted or merely proposed. “Nobody can refuse fibre” is too broad. Clear distinctions help the administrator, owner and resident arrange an installation without relying on promises the draft cannot support.

1. What is being consulted on and until when?

The telecommunications secretariat’s announcement of 1 October 2026 introduces a bill implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1309. Its aims include reusing existing infrastructure, coordinating civil works and clarifying permit procedures.

Official consultation #1413 opened on 30 September 2026 at 22:29. When checked, it remained open until 15 October 2026 at 09:00. Its published text is the basis for the national proposals described below.

Posting a consultation is not enactment or publication in the Government Gazette. Wording, responsibilities and transitional provisions may change. Anyone planning works now should check the currently applicable framework and, once the legislative process finishes, the final officially published text.

2. The EU Regulation already has an application timetable

Regulation (EU) 2024/1309, the Gigabit Infrastructure Act, did not begin with this Greek consultation. Its general application started on 12 November 2025. Special dates include 12 February 2026 for Article 10(1)–(3), and 12 May 2026 for certain digital procedures.

The European Commission explains its infrastructure-sharing and civil-works coordination approach. An existing route may reduce additional drilling, but its technical suitability and the particular access terms must still be examined. Reuse is a practical objective, not a reason to ignore an unsafe or unsuitable route.

Article 11 of the Regulation preserves property rights. Facilitating connectivity does not authorise unrestricted entry into an apartment. The building’s access point and the private route to a particular home remain different issues, even where they are part of the same proposed connection.

3. The draft proposal for shared building areas

Draft Article 8(3) provides for notifying an application to the administrator or the representative of the owners’ general meeting. Proposed access to common or jointly owned areas is linked to one month passing without notification of a unanimous general-meeting decision refusing the works.

This one-month arrangement is a proposal in the draft under examination. It must not be presented as a newly enacted entitlement created by this consultation. Nor should silence following an informal telephone conversation be confused with a documented notification of the application described in the text.

For organised discussions, an application should explain the proposed route, equipment locations, expected duration and contact person. Keeping the notification and meeting minutes helps any disagreement focus on actual works rather than conflicting recollections of a conversation. This is practical preparation, not a substitute for checking the operative law.

4. Private property requires separate consent

The same proposed article distinguishes private property. If shared areas are insufficient and access to private property is required, works take place after the owner’s consent. The owner may request an impact and restoration study from the provider and a related agreement.

A cable through a shared staircase and a cable through an apartment raise different questions. The building’s agreement should not be confused with personal permission to enter a home. Where a tenant is involved, the owner–tenant relationship and the specific intervention also require examination.

Written consent can specify the route, access hours, protection of furniture and surfaces, restoration and completion checks. These are useful matters to agree in advance. Permission for a particular installation is not an unlimited licence to enter or to undertake materially different work.

5. Disturbance, restoration and poor workmanship

Draft Article 8(4) provides for informing the administrator or owners’ representative about the works and restoration, minimising disturbance and using available existing infrastructure. It also requires full restoration of affected property elements, preserving the building’s appearance and functionality.

The draft refers to providers’ civil liability for damage caused by poor workmanship or failure to apply standards and technical specifications. It does not establish a universal automatic payment at a fixed amount for every inconvenience. The harm, its cause and the applicable law still require assessment.

Dated photographs of relevant shared areas and a description of their initial condition can help before work begins. Afterwards, a completion record can state what was finished and what remains to be repaired. Avoid unnecessary photographs of people or third parties’ private interiors: the purpose is to document the works.

6. Permits and disputes follow different procedures

Proposed Article 9 describes a four-month permit period from a complete application, subject to the text’s conditions. This concerns an administrative permit and differs from the proposed one-month building-notification arrangement.

Proposed Article 10 concerns dispute resolution with a role for EETT. The route and authority must correspond to the subject of the dispute. A technical-access disagreement is not identical to every private compensation claim or ownership issue.

Residents should also separate infrastructure installation from a connection contract. A shared installation alone does not determine the chosen provider, monthly price or agreed service level. Ask which questions concern the building works and which concern an individual subscription before signing documents.

7. What a building can organise now

Request a specific technical proposal, identify shared and private points, check the building regulations and keep written communications. Agree who supervises the work, how damage is reported and how restoration will be evidenced. In a genuine dispute, technical assessment and legal advice can help avoid installation based on contested permission.

Anyone wishing to influence the bill can submit a substantiated comment through the official consultation within its published deadline. A useful contribution describes a concrete difficulty and a proposed solution. For later works, look for the final Government Gazette publication: that text and the applicable EU framework will determine binding procedures.

Official sources and editorial note

Sources: the secretariat’s 1 October announcement, OpenGov #1413, Regulation 2024/1309 and the European Commission.

Prepared with AI assistance and checked against the cited official sources on 10 October 2026. This is general legal information, not individual legal advice or a statement that a human lawyer has assessed a particular case. The national proposals described remained under consultation on that date.