Statutory Regime

The statutory framework governing insurance contracts is primarily set out in:

• the Italian Civil Code (Articles 1882 to 1932);
• Legislative Decree No 209 of 2005 (Code of Private Insurance) dated 7 September 2005; and
• the regulations issued by the Italian Institute for Insurance Supervision (IVASS).

Procedural Regime

If no specific mechanisms for dispute resolution (arbitration, ADR) are provided, any dispute arising from insurance contracts will be heard in civil courts under the same rules for other civil law disputes provided in the Italian Civil Procedure Code.

Mediation is a mandatory pre-condition to commence civil proceedings based on an insurance contract. However, this does not apply when the insured seeks the joinder of the insurer within the underlying civil proceedings commenced by the claimant against the insured party (see 1.3 Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)).

The Litigation Process

Standard civil proceedings begin with the service of a writ of summons, which must set out the factual and legal grounds of the claim and indicate the date of the hearing not earlier than 120 days from service (or 150 days for foreign defendants). The defendant has to file a statement of defence at least 70 days before the first hearing, responding to the claimant’s allegations.

The parties then have three consecutive terms (40, 20 and 10 days before the hearing) to file additional pleadings to specify their defences and submit new documents or request further evidence (witnesses, expertise etc). At the first hearing, the judge verifies if the dispute can be decided on the basis of the documents already submitted or if additional evidence is required.

When the case is ready for a decision, the parties are assigned three consecutive terms to submit their demands, conclusive pleadings and rebuttals. At the final hearing the judge reserves the judgement. No mandatory deadline for issuing the judgement is provided by the law. The judgement is provisionally enforceable and its enforceability is not suspended by the appeal. All pleadings and exhibits must be filed electronically with the court.

Rules on Limitation

Actions in tort are subject to a five-year limitation period from the date when the cause of action occurred or the later date when the claimant became or could have reasonably become aware of such cause of action.

For actions in contract the limitation period is generally ten years from the date when the breach of contract occurred although a shorter limitation period applies to certain contracts.

The running of the limitation period can be interrupted by either commencing court proceedings or sending demand letters, in which case a new limitation period starts to run.

The most recent reform of the Italian Civil Procedure Code in 2023 has encouraged ADR by:

• facilitating access to these procedures;
• simplifying the procedural rules governing ADR so decisions can be issued more quickly; and
• making mediation mandatory for certain matters.

Mediation and assisted negotiation procedures are mandatory for bringing standard civil proceedings on certain matters, including insurance, banking and financial contracts, leases of commercial properties, etc. If mandatory mediation is not carried out before commencing legal action, the judge:

• declares the legal action inadmissible;
• orders the parties to start mediation/ADR within 15 days; and
• suspends the case until mediation is completed.

Despite expectations about the benefits of this reform, reality shows that insurers prefer to settle the case out of mediation. Arbitration in insurance disputes is less common, except for reinsurance matters.

Jurisdiction

In international disputes involving a party domiciled outside the EU, the jurisdiction of the Italian civil courts is established on the basis of the principles set out in Law No 218 of 1995 dated 31 May 1995. Under Article 3 of Law 218 of 1995, Italian jurisdiction exists whenever the defendant is domiciled or resident in Italy.

In disputes involving a party domiciled in another EU member state, jurisdiction is established according to EU Regulation 1215/2012 (the “Regulation”), which governs civil and commercial jurisdiction in the EU.

In particular, Article 4 of the Regulation sets out the general criteria for determining jurisdiction and states that, if a person has its domicile in a member state, that person can be sued in another member state unless other provisions of the Regulation prevail. In fact, Article 7 of the Regulation sets different rules for establishing jurisdiction in cases of contractual obligations, torts/delicts, actions for damages, etc. Article 25 of the Regulation also recognises jurisdiction regulated by a contractual clause agreed between the parties if the clause complies with the formal requirements provided in the Regulation.

Articles 11 to 16 of the Regulation set out the rules to determine jurisdiction when the defendant is an insurer, taking into account the risk of the insurance contract as well as the specific features of the dispute.

Choice of Law

When no valid choice of law is made in the insurance contract, the following rules apply.

• With regards to EU disputes, the Rome I Convention (Regulation 593/2008) clarifies that the applicable law is that of the country where the insurer has its habitual residence.
• With regards to disputes involving a party domiciled outside the EU, Law 218 of 1995 transposes the Rome I Convention. The applicable law is therefore that of the country where the insurer has its habitual residence.

In Italy, a foreign judgment is enforced on the basis of Law 218 of 1995 and EU Regulation 1215/2012. Regulation 1215/2012 recognises EU judgments delivered in another member state without any procedural formalities. This principle also applies to the enforcement of judgments delivered in another member state. International judgments issued outside the EU are enforced in Italy in line with Articles 64 and 65 of Law 218 of 1995 subject to some controls by the competent Court of Appeals.

Italian Litigation Features

Particular features of litigation in Italy include:

• court fees are proportional to the quantum of the claim;
• the loser-pays rule normally applies;
• there is no general duty of disclosure in Italian court proceedings, but one party can ask the court to order the other party to disclose specific documents;
• the damaged party does not have direct action against the wrongdoer’s insurer. Only the insured party can act against the insurer (with the main exceptions being motor insurance and medical malpractice insurance);
• the average duration of first instance proceedings is normally three years, but some cases and some courts can take longer; and
• first instance decisions can be appealed, and the appeal may lead to a completely new examination of the case while second instance decisions can be appealed before the Italian Supreme Court but it only reviews issues concerning jurisdiction and the correct application of law.

The Italian courts have recognised the validity of arbitration clauses included in insurance and reinsurance contracts since the introduction of arbitral rules in the Italian Civil Procedure Code. Article 819 ter of the Italian Civil Procedure Code allows the defendant to challenge the jurisdiction of the court in favour of arbitrators in its statement of defence. The latest reform of the Italian Civil Procedure Code in 2023 introduced new rules, which allow a party in cases involving lack of jurisdiction of the courts or of the arbitral tribunal to resume the case before the authority deemed competent.

Italy ratified the New York Convention in 1969 and then transposed the relevant provisions into the Italian Civil Procedure Code. Article 839 of the Italian Civil Procedure Code establishes the rules to recognise foreign awards in Italy. The party intending to enforce a foreign award must submit an appropriate application to the Court of Appeal where the counterparty is domiciled. If the award meets all of the necessary requirements, the Court of Appeal declares the foreign award immediately enforceable in Italy. Any interested party may challenge the Court’s decision.

Arbitration in Insurance Disputes

Some insurance contracts still include arbitration clauses, but arbitration is normally disregarded mainly because of its higher costs compared to court proceedings. However, a draft law is being prepared with a view to introducing insurance arbitration in small insurance disputes to reduce the courts’ workload.

Rules of Arbitration in Italy

The parties are free to opt for arbitration. The parties’ choice and the rules of arbitration are governed by Articles 806 to 840 of the Italian Civil Procedure Code. Under Italian law there is a difference between ritual and non-ritual arbitration with the former having the same effect as a court judgment and the latter having the same effect as a contract.

The parties can agree to settle a dispute within an arbitral tribunal in two different ways.

• By an arbitration clause: whenever the parties enter into an agreement, they can establish that any future dispute arising from that agreement will be settled by arbitration.
• By an arbitration agreement: which represents a separate agreement between the parties with the scope to refer a dispute to arbitration.

The final award can only be appealed in a strict number of cases before the Court of Appeal.

In setting the terms of an insurance contract, the parties are in principle free to negotiate the content of the contract of insurance provided that its terms do not breach internal public policy or have an illicit scope. Insurance policies distributed in the Italian market generally contain detailed terms and conditions. If the policy is silent on particular issues, various provisions of the Civil Code and the Code of Private Insurance are implied.

In addition, according to Article 1932 of the Civil Code, certain provisions in the matter of insurance (eg, those regarding the insured’s misrepresentation, reimbursement of legal costs to the insured and the breach of the insured party’s duty of salvage) are mandatory and can only be departed from in a way that is more favourable to the insured party.

Misrepresentation and non-disclosure rules are set out in Articles 1892 and 1893 of the Italian Civil Code. If the insured/policyholder, intentionally or through gross negligence, makes incorrect, incomplete or omissive declarations about material circumstances of the risk, the insurer can deny coverage and refuse to pay the indemnity (or is entitled to a proportional reduction of the indemnity where misrepresentation is attributable to simple negligence).

The insurer loses the right to challenge the contract if, within three months from the day on which he became aware of the insured’s misrepresentation, they fail to notify the insured party of its intention to challenge the contract. However, this does not apply when the misrepresentation is discovered after the claim was made. In this case the insurer can refuse payment without breaching the contract.

Over the last 12 months the Italian civil courts have addressed a significant number of insurance-related issues, including:

• claims made clauses – the debate around the validity of claims made clauses is not over and the Italian courts continue to issue some conflicting decisions. However, in general the Supreme Court has finally accepted claims made clauses upon certain conditions and the law has imposed claims made PI insurance onto some categories of professionals;
• misrepresentation and prior knowledge – this is one of the coverage defences most frequently raised by insurers in financial lines litigations and case law is particularly focused on the information requested by the insurer in the proposal form to ascertain whether non-disclosure can be attributed to the insured party’s wilful misconduct, gross negligence or simple negligence;
• multiple insurance – in February 2024 the Italian Supreme Court ruled on the apportionment of the amount due by each insurer in case of multiple insurance, providing clarity on a long-debated issue; and
• interpretation of insurance contracts – the Italian Supreme Court is giving prominence, in the interpretation of insurance contracts, to the contra proferentem rule set out in the Civil Code and case law is using it as a contra insurer rule.

Notwithstanding coverage disputes being subject to mandatory mediation (see 1.3 Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)), only a few disputes are settled within the mediation procedure with most of them ending up in court. Court proceedings involving coverage issues are often settled before the judgement is delivered, especially during the taking of evidence phase, which gives insurers access to lots of information and details that enable the parties to determine whether the claim is grounded or not and try and settle out-of-court.

Reinsurance disputes are in principle governed by the same procedural rules as insurance litigation, although mediation is not mandatory. However, in reinsurance contracts arbitration is a very popular means of dispute resolution and the vast majority of reinsurance treaties provide for disputes to be resolved by London arbitration.

If the insured party is a consumer, then its interests are protected under the Italian Consumer Code. In particular, clauses included in insurance contracts with consumers are subject to Articles 33 and 36 of the Consumer Code (Legislative Decree No 206 of 2005 dated 6 September 2005) which state that any clause excluding or limiting the consumer’s rights or resulting in a significant imbalance in the consumer’s obligations vis-à-vis the insurers is null and void.

Any third party with a claim against an insured party cannot enforce the insurance contract against the insurer nor sue the insurer directly. The insured party is the only party entitled to seek coverage under the policy and to bring any action against its insurer. The only exceptions relate to motor insurance and medical malpractice insurance.

The concept of bad faith does not exist under Italian laws. Certain provisions in the Italian Civil Code instead refer to the concept of good faith. Italian laws require good faith in the performance of contractual obligations. More specifically, the creditor and the debtor must behave in good faith and they must preserve and respect the counterparty’s interests in performing the contract.

Even though there is not a bad faith concept, in insurance litigation cases the civil courts have recognised the concept of mala gestio, which occurs when the insurer does not handle the claim in good faith. In this case, the insured party can seek compensation of the interest and damage suffered as a consequence of the conduct (see 4.8 Penalties for Late Payment of Claims). They can also report the insurer’s conduct to the IVASS.

In Italy, penalties for insurers paying claims late were only present in motor liability claims and they were cancelled in 2018. Before the cancellation, an insurer who paid claims late was subject to an administrative fine, which increased as the delay increased.

Insurers nowadays therefore have no penalties. However, unjustified late payments may constitute a mala gestio conduct by the insurer in the execution of the insurance agreement, which is contrary to the principle of good faith governing all legal relationships (see 4.7 The Concept of Bad Faith) and it entitles the insured party to claim:

• interest – if no interest rate is agreed, the legal interest rate is currently 2.5%, while the default interest on belated payments in commercial transactions is currently equal to 12%, which should be calculated running from the writ of summons’ notification date. The legal interest rate is updated annually and the default interest rate biannually by the decree/communication of the Ministry of Economy published in the Official Gazette; and
• damages – insurers will also bear any further damage the claimant/the insured party can demonstrate they have suffered due to the delay.

Unless the insurance contract provides otherwise, insured parties are not bound by representations made by the broker. However, proposal forms and questionnaires are normally completed by the insured party.

Article 1 of the Italian Code of Private Insurance defines a “broker” as “any person professionally engaged in activities aimed at placing in direct contact with insurance or reinsurance undertakings, to which he/she is not bound by any commitment whatsoever, persons who intend to cover risks with his/her collaboration, assisting them in determining the content of the relevant contracts and collaborating, where appropriate, in their management and execution”.

In light of this definition, case law treats the broker as the insured party’s trusted advisor on all aspects relating to the insurance contract but they do not represent the insured party and their representations are binding on the insured party. However, the policy and/or a specific agreement may provide otherwise.

Delegated underwriting or claims handling authority arrangements are common in Italy. Insurance companies quite often outsource both underwriting and claim handling. The agreements normally provide for a capped authority, which can be only exceeded upon approval from the insurer. While claims between intermediaries and insurance companies are possible, they are not common as commercial realities tend to prevail.

As pointed out under 2.3 Unique Features of Litigation Procedure, liability insurance coverage necessarily includes cover for the costs of funding an insured party’s defence. Article 1917 of the Italian Civil Code provides that the liability insurer has to pay the insured party’s legal costs incurred in defending the claim up to a maximum of 25% of the policy limit. In addition, when the sum due to the damaged party is greater than the policy limit, legal costs are shared between the insurer and the insured party in proportion to their respective interests.

The rationale of this provision is that the insured party’s defence is carried out in the interest of the insurer because, defending the claim, the insured party is also reducing the risk of the policy limit being eroded. The insurer’s obligation to pay the insured party’s legal costs is ancillary to the main obligation to pay the indemnity so that, if the claim is not covered, no legal costs will be paid by the insurer to the insured.

The rules set out in 5.1 Main Areas of Claims Where Insurers Fund the Defence of Insureds above regarding the insured party’s legal costs are compulsory. There are therefore unlikely to be significant changes in the near future.

In Italy, there is a specific Ministerial Decree (No 55 of 2014) which sets out the criteria to establish courts and lawyers’ fees between a minimum and a maximum, which are:

• the quantum of damages sought;
• the complexity of the litigation;
• the number of parties; and
• the competent judge.

These criteria are set out in a range that covers all the phases of the proceedings as well as their various complexity. As those criteria have recently been amended by Ministerial Decree No 147 of 2022, we do not expect further changes in the near future.

In Italy, there is no protection against legal cost risks for claimants. However, with respect to defendants’ legal costs, there are some specific insurance standalone products aimed at covering defence costs (tutela legale or legal expenses insurance).

Under Article 1916 of the Italian Civil Code – subrogated recovery action – the insurer is subrogated in the insured party’s rights against any third party upon payment of the indemnity.

The insurer’s right to bring subrogated recovery action is set out in Article 1916 of the Italian Civil Code. In order to exercise this right, the insurer must have paid the indemnity and informed the third party that it is now subrogated to the insured party’s rights. The subrogated recovery action is brought by the insurer in its own name.

It is not uncommon to see the insured party and insurer as co-claimants trying to recover the deductible or the sum exceeding the indemnity and the indemnity respectively. The insured party is liable for any conduct that may prejudice the insurer’s right of subrogation.

The main macroeconomic factors that have affected both the type and the amount of litigation and insurance-related litigation are as follows.

COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic represented a perfect condition for cyber criminals maximising their gain with the launch of an increased range and number of cyber-attacks. Threat actors leveraged the fact that the entire population was unexpectedly forced to work remotely from home, with fewer security measures available than in the workplace. The World Economic Forum reported that the pandemic led to a 50.1% increase in cyber-attacks and 30,000 cyber-attacks which were specifically COVID-19 related in the first quarter of 2020 alone.

This enormous threat to a technology-driven society inevitably also impacted the cyber-insurance sector, which faced a significant increase in the number of claims submitted by insured parties under their cyber policies for reimbursement of costs borne and losses suffered as a consequence of the cyber-attack suffered. However, the unpreparedness of the insured parties, due to the high level of stress, anxiety and worry they were facing during the pandemic, to properly react to the cyber-attack and/or to comply with the cyber policy requirement, led to several coverage requests being declined. This in turn led to subsequent challenges by insured parties and coverage-related litigation.

COVID-19 also had a huge impact on other policies such as those covering business interruption (in Italy, mainly cyber, all risks and property) and all those covering medical expenses.

Russia-Ukraine War

Cyber-attacks have been used as an additional weapon during the Russia-Ukraine war. They have involved very cyber capable states and while some other insurance sectors have been able to exclude the claims by resorting to war exclusion, this was not that easy with reference to cyber insurance (see 7.3 Coverage Issues and Test Cases), where the conflict has had a huge impact.

Natural Disasters

Climate change has brought a huge increase in natural disasters in Italy, where floods, tornadoes and hail were not that common. This change was not expected and that is why insurers and insured parties did not factor it in during the underwriting phase where the insured parties did not buy policies covering this kind of risk and many insurers did not correctly assess the risk when issuing policies covering it. This uncertainty resulted in lots of litigation and new insurance products being developed by insurers (parametric insurance).

If we take a look at the next 12 months, we expect the following scenarios.

• COVID-19 claims will decrease: in Italy COVID-19 cases have already decreased and hopefully will decrease further in the next year. In any case, insurers have now drafted policies that take this kind of risk into account.
• Russia-Ukraine War: claims will be stationary unless the war ends. Where the war does end, claims will significantly decrease. However, we don’t see the war ending in the next year.
• Natural disaster claims will decrease: in fact, the Italian legislator has required all corporate entities to take out natural disaster insurance by the end of 2024 (see 8.1 Impact of ESG on Underwriting and Litigating Insurance Risks). This should lead to fewer disputes. By contrast, coverage disputes around these new policies will inevitably arise.

COVID-19 Pandemic

The first coverage issue related to COVID-19 is that no one, including the insurance sector, was ready for the outbreak of the pandemic. This often resulted in a lack of pandemic exclusions, which brought insurers to cover those claims. Some policies provided for the exclusion of losses arising out of public authority orders, which led to requests for cover for BI losses being denied. The insured parties challenged these rejections multiple times.

One of the most important coverage issues related to COVID-19 concerned is its classification as a disease or injury, which is still uncertain.

Russia-Ukraine War

With reference to claims arising from the Russia-Ukraine war, insurers and insured parties have been litigating around the validity and strength of war exclusion within cyber policies. The reason for this is that, despite the existence of the exclusion, unlike traditional war scenarios, it is very often difficult to identify the perpetrator of a cyber-attack and if the attack has come from a war zone or not. Another issue is the lack of a clear and standard definition for the term “war” in the exclusion clauses of cyber-insurance products. The difficulty in attributing and proving cyber war events, on the one hand, and the lack of a clear definition of war on the other put insurers, who bear the burden of proof if a claim is denied, in an extremely weak position when litigating for declining coverage by invoking the war exclusion.

Natural Disasters

As outlined in 8.1 Impact of ESG on Underwriting and Litigating Insurance Risks, natural disasters were often not included in the risk taken by insurers and this gap led the Italian legislator to intervene.

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has certainly affected the scope of insurance contracts. One of the main direct effects in the policy wording is the insertion of a pandemic exclusion.

Furthermore, both the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war have significantly changed the appetite for cyber-risk. In fact, due to these two factors, Italy is now more conscious of the changes brought by technology, both in personal and professional life (remote working, e-commerce, etc) and this resulted in being more sensitive to the risks related to technologies, particularly cyber-attacks.

The increase in natural disasters has also significantly affected the scope of insurance contracts as it persuaded the legislator to require corporate entities to take out insurance for those events. It also led insurers to design new insurance products such as parametric insurance (see 8.1 Impact of ESG on Underwriting and Litigating Insurance Risks).

The most recent and important news concerning ESG is related to the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) which significantly changes the scope and nature of corporate sustainability reporting. The CSRD significantly expands existing rules on non-financial reporting.

According to the CSRD companies must record the effect of sustainability aspects on the financial position of the company and they must clarify the impact of sustainability considerations on operations. The report will need to include information on sustainability goals, the role of the executive board and the supervisory board, the most significant adverse impacts on the company, and intangible impacts not yet accounted for.

Italy is in the process of adopting the CSRD and on 30 August 2024 the Italian Council of Ministers definitively approved a Legislative Decree adapting EU Directive 2022/2464 (related to the CSRD) into Italian legislation. The Decree is effective after publication on 10 September 2024 in the Official Gazette of the Italian Republic.

This change will affect both the underwriting and claim handling of PI and D&O risks. Insurers will need to take the new obligation imposed on D&Os into account when drafting the policy and the policy proposal. They will need to consider that the risk related to D&O liabilities will slightly increase as this directive will put further obligations on them.

Recent case law on the compensation rights of a data subject for non-material damages suffered as a consequence of a data breach pursuant to Article 82 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will be considered and kept in mind by insurers in assessing their potential exposure under a cyber policy. While in the past (Supreme Court Decisions Nos 16402/2021 and 17383/2020) the requirements for the data subject affected by a data breach to seek non-material damages were very strict as they were awarded only in case of serious violation of its privacy right and of significant damage, the data affected subjects can seek and obtain compensation even when the violation of their privacy right is trivial and the damage only potential (Supreme Court Decision No 13073/2023 and ECJ C-340/21 and C-300/21).

Civil Procedure Reform

Legislative Decree No 149 of 2022 dated 10 October 2022 (the “Cartabia Reform”) came into effect in 2023. Though the Cartabia Reform involved the entire Italian justice system, significant civil procedure changes were specifically introduced to modernise the system and make it more efficient. The Cartabia Reform was aimed at reducing the backlog of cases in the Italian courts as well as the length of civil proceedings.

Statutory Auditors’ Liability

On 29 May 2024 the Italian Chambers of Deputies approved a proposed law on statutory auditors’ liability. The law proposes bringing the moment when the limitation period starts to run forward and limiting the quantum of damages recoverable (to be based on the statutory auditors’ annual fees). Final approval by the Senate is expected in the next few months.

Medical Malpractice

Seven years after the enactment of Law No 24 of 2017 (the “Gelli-Bianco Law”) regulating medical malpractice in Italy, Decree No 232 of 2024 was approved on 1 March 2024 and implemented certain provisions of the Gelli-Bianco Law, such as the applicability of direct action by the damaged party against healthcare facilities’ and health professionals’ insurers, regulating the content and requirements of their insurance policies and setting the minimum mandatory standards for these policies.

Cybersecurity

The recent legislative and regulatory developments at European level on cybersecurity (NIS2 Directive No 2022/2555, are being implemented in Italy through the scheme of the Legislative Decree submitted by the Italian government to the Parliament for approval on 17 June 2024 – the DORA Regulation No 2022/2554 and Cyber Resilience Act) are expected to have a significant impact on both cyber and D&O insurance.

The common thread between all of these new legislative provisions is the strengthening of cybersecurity and digital operational resilience of European companies through introducing policies and procedures to be adopted by a broad range of entities for preventing and properly handling cyber-attacks (with a focus on supply chain aspects) and of strict reporting obligations and encouraging the sharing of intelligence and co-operation among member states with respect to cyber-attacks registered in each jurisdiction.

These legislative changes are expected to positively affect the cyber-insurance sector in multiple ways. It will not only facilitate the underwriting process (considering that intelligence sharing will result in a better understanding of risk and considering that the new mandatory cybersecurity measures to be adopted will make the risk assessment process much easier) but will also increase the underwriting opportunities (due to increased cybersecurity awareness among a broader group of stakeholders).

From a claims perspective it will also likely reduce the risk of successful cyber-attacks (considering the many preventative measures introduced by the new legislation) and most importantly, a decrease in related losses (considering all the measures introduced for a prompt handling of cyber-attacks and, subsequently, to mitigate the potential losses).

However, a negative aspect for D&O insurers is that the new European legislation has also expressly introduced management liability for the definition, approval and monitoring of the implementation of risk management measures (also with respect to non-executive directors and the supervisory board), which will result in new possible claims under D&O policies if the members of the board of directors and/or the supervisory board breach the new rules and obligations on cybersecurity set out by EU legislation.

Motor Insurance

Legislative Decree No 184 of 2023 dated 22 November 2023 implemented EU Directive 2021/2118 and introduced several provisions into the Italian Insurance Code in terms of motor insurance regarding, inter alia, a new definition of vehicles, increases to the minimum limits for compulsory motor vehicle liability insurance, policies covering risk for multiple vehicles, a recovery action against the Italian Guarantee Fund and a quote generator comparing motor insurance prices.

Policies Covering Natural Catastrophes

As highlighted under 8.1 Impact of ESG on Underwriting and Litigating Insurance Risks, Law No 213 of 2023 dated 30 December 2023 introduced a new category of compulsory insurance aimed at covering damage to companies’ assets caused by natural disasters and catastrophic events.