lacks, generically, the juridical cause which might justify it and make it operative." 126. In support of this conclusion, the Prefect explained that the Mayor had believed that he could deal with the situation by means of a requisition, without appreciating that "the state of the Company as a result of circumstances of a functionaleconomic and market nature, was such as not to permit of the continuation of its activity". He also emphasized the shutdown of the plant and the protest actions of the staff, and the fact that the requisition had not succeeded in preserving public order. Finally the Prefect also observed that the order had been adopted "anchesotto l'injlusso dellepressioni e dei rilieviformulati dalla stampa cittadina, per cui è da ritenere che il Sindaco, anche per sottrarvisi e dimostrare l'intendimento della Pubblica Amministrazione di intervenire in qualche modo, addivenne alla requisizione quale provvedimento diretto più che altro a porre in evidenza la sua intenzione di affrontare comunque ilproblema". In the translation of the Prefect's decision supplied by the Applicant : "also under the influence of the pressure created by, and of the remarks made by the local press; therefore we have to hold that the Mayor, also in order to get out of the above and to show the intent of the Public Administration to intervene in one way or another, issued the order of requisition as a measure mainly directed to emphasize his intent to face the problem in some way [or, as quoted in the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Palermo, in the translation supplied by the Applicant : 'his intention to tackle the problem just the same']". It was of course understandable that the Mayor, as a public official, should have made his order, in some measure, as a response to local public pressures; and the Chamber does not see, in this passage of the Prefect's decision, any ground on which it might be suggested that the order was therefore arbitrary. 127. In the action brought by the trustee in bankruptcy for damages on account of the requisition, the Court of Palermo and subsequently the Court of Appeal of Palermo had to consider the legal significance of the decision of the Prefect. The Court of Palermo accepted the argument of the respondent administration that "ilprovvedimento prefettizio è sostanzialmente di revoca dell'atto richiamato essendo stati ritenuti irrealizzabiligli scopi cui 10 stesso miravano",i.e., that "the Prefect's order is in substance a revocation of the act in question, the objectives which were contemplated by it having been adjudged to have been impossible to achieve". When the matter came before the Court of Appeal, it observed that this argument was contrary to the argument of the trustee in bankmptcy "che ravvisa in