The Italian legal system is based on civil law. The Constitution is the fundamental law and all other laws and regulations, including those on dispute resolution, shall comply with it.

Our legal system follows an adversarial model that guarantees the equality of the parties and the right of defence, as required by the Constitution.

The legal process is conducted primarily through written submissions.

The Italian court system is composed of national courts, dealing with civil, criminal and administrative proceedings.

Civil and criminal courts have three levels of jurisdiction:

• the court of first instance;
• the court of appeal; and
• the Supreme Court of Cassation.

Administrative courts have two levels of jurisdiction:

• administrative courts of first instance; and
• Consiglio di Stato.

Special courts have jurisdiction on other matters (eg, tax).

Civil courts are organised into specialised divisions, including a division dealing with commercial disputes.

Judges are autonomous and independent of any other power.

Court filings and proceedings are not open to the public. In some special cases, documents and information filed during the proceedings can be kept confidential even between the parties.

Hearings are generally open to the public, but the judge can order otherwise in the cases expressly provided by law (eg, for security reasons).

Judgments are public, but personal data is generally removed for data protection reasons.

With few exceptions, all parties to court proceedings have to be represented by an attorney duly admitted to the Italian Bar Association.

The representation before the Supreme Court of Cassation is only permitted to attorneys registered in a special section of the Bar Association.

Foreign lawyers cannot conduct cases before Italian courts. Special provisions apply to attorneys from other EU countries.

Third-party litigation funding is not common in our legal system, but it is gaining ground in Italy as well, in particular in areas such as class actions and enforcement of judgments.

For the time being, there is no specific law regulating it.

The only laws that deal with litigation funding are:

• Recommendation of the European Commission of 11 June 2013, which prohibits influencing the procedural decisions of the plaintiff (but this recommendation only deals with class actions for the violation of EU rules); and
• the Italian Code of Conduct for Lawyers, which does not expressly regulate litigation funding, but some of the rules of this code may be at odds with the functioning of litigation funding.

The issue of validity and enforceability of agreements on third-party litigation funding under Italian law is still under discussion.

An obligation to disclose litigation funding is provided in the rules of certain arbitration institutions.

Third-party funding is not regulated and therefore there are no restrictions as to the type of lawsuits available for this type of funding.

Third-party funding is not regulated and therefore there are no restrictions as to the party that can receive the funding (although in practice it is generally the plaintiff).

Third-party funding is not regulated and therefore there is no minimum or maximum amount a third-party funder can fund.

A third-party funder will generally consider funding legal costs, experts’ fees and court fees.

Contingency fees, in particular fees determined as a percentage of the recovery amount, are not permitted.

Success fees are permitted provided that they are a minor component of the total fees.

Third-party funding is not regulated and therefore there is no time limit by when a party to the litigation should obtain third-party funding.

Parties are generally not required to take any pre-action steps.

However, in certain cases, the plaintiff is required to attempt mediation or negotiation assisted by lawyers.

In particular:

• mediation is compulsory before initiating proceedings when the dispute relates to certain specific matters such as, among others, insurance, banking and financial contracts; and
• negotiation assisted by lawyers is compulsory before initiating proceedings for small claims (not exceeding EUR50,000).

If the plaintiff fails to comply, the court can order it to pursue the attempt of mediation or negotiation. If the plaintiff does not comply with this order, the court can dismiss the claim.

The plaintiff is not required to send a pre-action letter and the potential defendant is not required to respond to such a letter, if any. Nevertheless, it is common that, before initiating proceedings, the plaintiff sends a formal notice to the defendant and the latter responds to such a letter.

The statute of limitation applicable to civil suits is ten years and starts on the day the right can be exercised. A shorter period applies in certain cases, for example:

• five years as regards tort liability;
• five years as regards rights arising out of corporate relationships; and
• one year as regards rights arising out of shipping contracts and contracts of carriage.

The law sets out in detail the cases in which the limitation period is suspended or interrupted.

The jurisdictional requirements for a defendant to be sued in Italy are governed by Law No 218/1995, according to which:

• Italian jurisdiction exists if the defendant is domiciled in Italy or has in Italy a representative authorised to appear in court; and
• in civil and commercial matters, the rules set forth in EU Regulation No 1215 of 2012 (“Brussels Recast”) apply; Brussels Recast must be considered applicable for the regulation of conflicts of jurisdiction even if they concern non-EU states. 

The general rule is that of the defendant’s domicile.

By way of example, other rules are provided for:

• in contractual matters, a person may be sued before the court of the state of performance of the obligation; and
• in tort matters, a person may be sued before the court of the state where the harmful event occurred.

Italian jurisdiction exists if the parties have conventionally accepted it and this acceptance is evidenced in writing, or if the defendant enters an appearance without objecting to the lack of jurisdiction.

The initial phase of the lawsuit varies depending on the type of procedure chosen.

In ordinary proceedings, the plaintiff sues other parties by means of a writ of summons.

The writ of summons must contain:

• the indication of the court before which the claim is brought;
• the name, surname, residence of the plaintiff, and the name, surname, residence or domicile of the defendant and of the persons representing or assisting them; if the plaintiff or defendant is a company, it must contain its name or business name, and the indication of the body or office representing it in the proceedings;
• the indication, in cases where the application is subject to a condition as to admissibility, of the fulfilment of the condition;
• the subject of the claim;
• the specific description of the facts and grounds of law on which the summons is based and the specific indication of the means of proof on which the plaintiff intends to rely and, in particular, the documents which he/she produces in court;
• the date of the hearing; and
• an invitation to the defendant to file the statement of defence within 70 days before the date of the hearing and a series of warnings to the defendant, with the warning that filing an appearance after the aforementioned time limits entails some forfeitures, that the technical defence by a lawyer is compulsory and that the party, where the legal requirements are met, may apply for legal aid.

The plaintiff is permitted to amend the claims made in the writ of summons with an additional brief filed before the first hearing. The plaintiff cannot file additional claims, unless this is necessary in response to the defendant’s counterclaims or defences.

In ordinary proceedings, the plaintiff must serve the writ of summons on the defendant(s).

This service is typically carried out by the court’s bailiff at the plaintiff’s request. Alternatively, it can be performed directly by the plaintiff’s attorney via registered letter or certified email.

For services abroad, the court’s bailiff generally handles the process at the plaintiff’s request, in accordance with the relevant EU regulations (for services to be made within the European Union), the Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters or other applicable international conventions or bilateral treaties.

If the defendant, after being properly served, does not respond to a lawsuit, he/she is declared in default and the proceedings continue.

The defaulting party must be served with certain documents, such as the order admitting formal hearing or briefs containing new claims.

The defaulting party may appear in court at any time during the proceedings up to the last hearing. In doing so, the defaulting party can be authorised by the court to carry out activities that are precluded at that stage of the proceedings if he/she proves that he/she was not aware of the proceedings due to the nullity of the writ of summons or of its service or that his/her appearance was prevented by a cause not attributable to him/her.

Articles 840-bis to 840-sexiesdecies of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure are dedicated to collective proceedings, in which class action is precisely regulated.

By the class action, a non-profit organisation or association, whose statutory objectives include the protection of “homogeneous individual rights” (eg, rights of consumers, professionals, companies, investors, etc) or each member of the class may bring an action against the author of misconducts and torts in order to ascertain the liability and obtain damages.

Only organisations and associations registered in a public list established at the Ministry of Justice may bring the class action, without prejudice to the legal standing of each member of the class.

Opt-In

The joining system provided for by the class action rules is based on the opt-in mechanism – eg, it is required that the individual explicitly consents to be included in the class. The individuals joining the class have to expressly grant to the common representative the authority to represent them in the proceedings.

At the outset of a litigation or potential litigation, attorneys are required to inform the client of the level of complexity of the case and to provide him/her in writing with a cost estimate.

Please see 6.1 Circumstances of Injunctive Relief. 

A party can apply for early judgment in the following cases.

Order for the Payment of Undisputed Sums

During the proceedings, a party may apply to obtain an order for the payment of the sums that are not challenged by the parties.

Order for Injunction

During the proceedings, the parties may ask the court, when the claim consists in the payment of a liquid sum of money, or in the delivery of a certain quantity of fungible assets or of a specific movable asset and it is proved in writing, to order the relevant payment or delivery.

Order Following the Closure of the Investigation

During the proceedings, once the investigation phase has been completed, on application of the party seeking an order for the payment of sums of money or the delivery or release of assets, the court may order the payment, delivery or release, if the court deems that sufficient evidence has been presented.

Injunction Proceeding

The injunction proceeding is the special and summary proceeding by which the holder of a liquid, certain and collectable claim, based on written proof, may obtain, by submitting an application to court, an order (“decree ingiuntivo”) requiring the debtor to perform the obligation (of payment or delivery) within 40 days from the service, warning him/her that within the same period he/she may file an opposition (thus transforming the summary proceedings into ordinary proceedings) and that, in the absence of opposition, enforcement will take place.

Orders Immediately Granting or Rejecting the Claim

The Cartabia Reform has introduced the following orders.

• Order granting the claim: In disputes concerning disposable rights, the court, on application by a party, may, during the proceedings of first instance, issue an order granting the claim, if the facts are proven and the opposing party’s defences appear manifestly ungrounded. The order is provisionally enforceable, but it can be appealed and does not acquire the force of res judicata.
• Order rejecting the claim: In disputes relating to disposable rights, the court, on application by a party, may, during the proceedings of first instance and after the first hearing, issue an order dismissing the application if it is manifestly unfounded or if the nullity of the summons has not been cured or the subject of the claim is absolutely uncertain. The order can be appealed and does not acquire the force of res judicata.

Please see 4.2 Early Judgment Applications.

An interested party that is not the plaintiff/claimant or defendant may join a lawsuit in the following cases.

Voluntary Joinder

Any interested party may join proceedings between other parties in order to assert a claim against all or some of them that relates to the subject matter of, or is dependent upon, the cause of action in the proceedings. The interested party may also intervene to support the arguments of other parties if they have an interest of their own in the case.

The third party can join the proceedings by filing a statement of defence before the filing of the final briefs.

Joinder Upon Request of One of the Parties

The parties involved in the proceedings may request to sue a third person whom they consider to have a common interest in the case or who is liable for securing the claims.

Under penalty of forfeiture, the defendant wishing to sue the third party must do so in the statement of defence.

On the other hand, the plaintiff may request the court’s authorisation to sue a third party if the need arises as a result of the defendant’s defence in the statement of defence.

Joinder Upon the Court’s Order

The court itself may order the inclusion of a third person in the proceedings if it determines that the case is sufficiently connected to that individual. The court can order the intervention of a third party at any stage of the proceedings.

The defendant cannot apply for an order that the plaintiff/claimant must pay a sum of money as security for the defendant’s costs. In ordinary proceedings, there is no security for the defendant’s legal costs.

However, in interim proceedings, in the order granting or confirming the precautionary measure, the court may impose a security for damages on the applicant, having assessed all the circumstances.

Courts deal with the costs of an interim application/motion filed before proceedings in the decision on the interim measure if (i) the measure is not granted or (ii) the measure is granted and it is not compulsory to initiate proceedings on the merits (please see 4.2 Early Judgment Applications).

The costs of interim applications/motions requested during the proceedings on the merits are awarded by the court in the final judgment.

Courts generally deal with an application/motion within a period of one to six months, depending on the complexity of the case and on the number of hearings, if any, scheduled by the court. In more complex cases, a decision can take up to twelve months.

Parties can (and usually do) request that the application/motion be dealt with on an urgent basis, however this urgency is only considered by the court in exceptional cases.

The concept of “discovery”, as a phase of pretrial procedure in a lawsuit in which each party can obtain evidence from other parties by means of methods of discovery (such as interrogatories, requests for production of documents and requests for admissions), is unknown to the Italian legal system.

In Italian civil litigation, it is generally the responsibility of each party to provide the evidence needed to substantiate their claims in court. However, Italian law accounts for situations where a party cannot independently procure necessary evidence, offering various mechanisms to address this issue, including orders for the disclosure of documents or other items. 

The Order of Disclosure

The order of disclosure is the Italian legal concept that most closely resembles the concept of discovery in common law jurisdictions. The court, upon application by a party, may order the other party or a third party to exhibit in court a document or other thing deemed essential to the proceedings.

If the party fails to comply with the order of disclosure without a valid reason, the court shall order it to pay a fine and may draw adverse inferences from their non-compliance. If a third party fails to comply with the order, the court shall order it to pay a fine. However, a third party has the right to contest the order by joining the proceedings.

Except in cases where the order of disclosure is issued, the court may, on its own initiative, request information from the public administration regarding administrative acts or documents. The administration must reply within 60 days.

Lastly, a special disclosure procedure is provided for in Legislative Decree No 3/2017 (implementing the European directive 2014/104/EU) regarding damages disputes in antitrust matters.

Please see 5.1 Discovery and Civil Cases.

Please see 5.1 Discovery and Civil Cases.

In the Italian legal system, the regulation of evidence is set out in both the Civil Code, which provides for general rules on evidence, and the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides for the court’s powers over the evidence, and the methods for acquiring evidence during proceedings.

The Principle of “Burden of Proof”

According to the general rule, a party asserting a right in court must provide evidence to substantiate the facts on which the claim is based. Similarly, a party opposing the claim by asserting the ineffectiveness, modification, or extinguishment of the right bears the responsibility of proving the facts underlying their defence.

This principle, known as the “burden of proof”, is codified in Article 2697 of the Civil Code. It applies only to disputed facts; uncontested or widely recognised facts do not require evidence.

Types of Evidence

Evidence in Italian civil litigation can be classified based on various criteria:

• By mode of development and submission in court:
1. pre-trial evidence, such as documents; and
2. evidence to be taken by the judge at trial, such as inspection, oath, confession, testimony and free questioning.
• By effectiveness:
1. statutory evidence, such as notarised deed, legal presumptions, judicial confession and oath;
2. freely assessable evidence, such as testimony and simple presumptions; and
3. arguments of proof, such as conduct in court, which are not strictly evidence but serve to assess or reinforce existing evidence.
• By subject:
1. direct evidence, such as testimony; and
2. indirect evidence, such as simple presumptions.

Court’s Powers Over the Evidence

As to the court’s powers over the evidence, the court should ground the final decision on what the parties first claim and then prove, according to the principle of “parties’ disposal of evidence”.

In this regard the court has the authority to:

• assess the suitability and admissibility of the single evidence in the trial; and
• evaluate the evidence according to its prudent assessment and free belief (except for statutory evidence).

The court is not prevented from taking evidence on its own initiative, if needed.  For example:

• The judge may order the parties to appear for interrogation or conduct inspections of people or objects.
• Witnesses may be called to provide information.
• The court can request written information concerning administrative acts or documents from the public administration.

Our legal system recognises the concept of legal privilege (attorney-client or work product protection) but only in very limited cases:

• The legal privilege only applies in Italy to communications between an external lawyer and a client relating to the client’s right of defence in a specific court case.
• Italian courts have always applied the provisions on legal privilege restrictively. According to certain decisions of Italian courts (rendered in respect of the wiretapping of conversations between lawyers and clients, but which could also apply to other cases), the provisions on legal privilege do not prevent the authorities from collecting information, but rather from using it as evidence in case it is eventually established that it was protected by legal privilege.

The key Italian law provisions on legal privilege are contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure (Article 103), laying down the rules applicable – and the extent, if any, to which the legal privilege applies – to searches, inspections and seizures of documents at the lawyers’ offices, the wiretapping of conversations or communications between lawyers and between a lawyer and the client and the seizure and control in general of the correspondence between the accused party and his defence attorney.

Italian law also provides for the lawyers’ obligation of confidentiality and lays down the cases in which lawyers cannot be obliged to testify on facts of which they have obtained knowledge in the performance of their profession.

Other similar provisions are contained in the Italian Law on the Legal Profession and in the Italian Code of Conduct for Lawyers.

Special statutory provisions apply in certain matters. For example, the Italian Anti-money Laundering Law contains provisions aimed at balancing lawyers’ duty to report suspicious transactions to the authorities with lawyers’ duty of confidentiality.

The above rules and principles are generally not applicable to in-house counsel.

Please see 5.5 Legal Privilege.

The Prerequisites for Interim Action

To obtain interim relief, two key prerequisites must be met:

• fumus boni iuris (eg, the likelihood of existence of the claimed right); and
• periculum in mora (eg, the imminent risk of irreparable damage to the claimed right pending the trial on the merits).

In interim proceedings, evidence is assessed in a summary manner, tailored to the needs of a preliminary evaluation. The court does not need to establish the absolute validity of the claim but must determine whether it is likely to be valid.

Nature of the Injunctive Relief

Injunctive relief may serve either a conservative or anticipatory purpose, as outlined below.

Conservative injunctive relief

Such relief includes:

• judicial seizure of assets, when their ownership or right of possession is disputed;
• judicial seizure of evidence (such as documents or records), when the entitlement to their exhibition or communication is disputed;
• seizure of debtors’ assets upon application of a creditor who has a justified fear of losing the security of his/her claim (provided that their attachment is allowed); and
• seizure of sums that the debtor has offered to the creditor for the debt release when the obligation or the way of payment are disputed.

Anticipatory injunctive relief

Such relief includes:

• orders that prohibit or prevent a person from taking a particular action if harm may result from it;
• preventive collection of evidence (which includes obtaining witness testimony, technical inspections, and expert reports for settlement purposes);
• other emergency measures, that are not expressly provided for by law but suitable for provisionally securing the effects of the decision on the merits; and
• orders that safeguard the right of possession.

Please see 4.7 Application/Motion Timeframe.

If summoning of the other party could jeopardise the effectiveness of the injunctive relief, the court adopts the measure by decree “inaudita altera parte”, based on summary information if necessary.

In such a case, a hearing must be set for the parties to appear within a period not exceeding 15 days, assigning a time limit to the applicant (no more than eight days) for the service. At the hearing, the court may confirm, modify or revoke the measure.

Under Article 96 ICCP, if the court determines that the right for which the interim measure was granted does not exist, it may, upon the request of the opposing party, order the applicant to pay damages if the applicant failed to exercise ordinary diligence in pursuing the measure. Additionally, the court may impose a penalty on the applicant, requiring payment of an amount between EUR500 and EUR5,000 to the public treasury.

Under Article 669-undecies ICCP, the court may impose a security requirement on the applicant when granting, modifying, or confirming injunctive relief. This security acts as a guarantee for potential damages should the measure later be lifted.

Injunctive relief can be granted against worldwide assets of the respondent.

Injunctive relief may be obtained against third parties. For example, a conservative seizure order can be applied to receivables or assets owed or held by third parties on behalf of the respondent, provided that the attachment of such assets is legally permissible.

If a respondent fails to comply with the terms of an injunction involving assets, receivables and property, the applicant may proceed with their attachment. If a respondent fails to comply with the terms of an injunction involving obligations to deliver, release, act, or refrain from acting, enforcement is overseen by the court through a competent bailiff.

The court may impose a penalty under Article 614-bis ICCfor any infringement or non-compliance subsequently determined and any delay in executing the order.

The civil trial before the court consists of three stages:

• opening phase;
• collection of evidence phase; and
• decisional phase.

Following the service of the summons by the plaintiff, which must indicate the date of the first hearing, within 70 days before such hearing the defendant must file his/her statement of defence.

In the 15 days (the term is not mandatory) following the filing of the defendant’s statement of defence, the court shall carry out certain preliminary controls and may either confirm or postpone the date of the first hearing.

Subsequently, the parties are entitled to file three additional written briefs:

• The first brief must be submitted 40 days before the hearing. This document is used to present claims, objections, and defences that respond to the defendant’s counterclaims or objections. It also allows the parties to amend or clarify previously submitted claims and pleadings. At this stage, the plaintiff may request to involve third parties in the proceedings if their involvement arises from the defendant’s defences. Typically, the plaintiff also responds to the defences, objections, or counterclaims raised by the defendant during this period.
• The second brief, which is to be submitted 20 days before the hearing, addresses any new or amended claims and defences introduced by the opposing party. It is also used to raise new objections or defences in response to those claims. Importantly, this is the final opportunity for parties to submit requests for evidence, such as documents, witness testimonies, or technical expertise.
• The third brief, which is to be submitted ten days before the hearing, is aimed at replying to the new objections, if any, and filing the rebuttal evidence.

Both parties must attend the first hearing in person. Failure to appear without a valid reason may be taken into account by the court when making its decision. During this hearing, the judge is free to question the parties, seeking clarifications about the facts and may even attempt to mediate a resolution to the dispute.

The further steps (and timescale) mainly depend on the court decision on the taking of evidence. If evidence has to be taken, the court schedules the following hearings up to the final hearing. At this stage the procedure may involve witness/expert examination at hearings in the presence of the parties’ counsel.

Once the case is ready for resolution, the court sets a hearing for oral arguments and/or allows the parties to file final written briefs before issuing its final judgment.

In certain cases, typically when the facts are not challenged, the claim is based on documentary evidence, and/or the collection of evidence is not required, the court may opt for “simplified proceedings” to expedite the process.

The court must excise all powers aimed at the most prompt and fair course of the proceedings.

The oral hearing, even if previously scheduled, may be replaced by the filing of written notes, containing only motions and pleadings, if it does not require the presence of parties other than counsel, the parties, the prosecutor and the court assistants. In the same cases, the oral hearing may be replaced by the filing of written notes if all constituted parties so request.

In Italy, jury trials are not available in civil cases.

The deadline to submit requests for evidence to the court (eg, new documents, witness evidence, technical expertise) is the second brief to be filed 20 days before the date of the first hearing (please see 7.1 Trial Proceedings).

If the evidence appears to be admissible based on the statutory parameters, and relevant (eg, useful to ascertain the truth about the facts of the case), the court shall admit the evidence by order.

Further admission requirements are provided with respect to each single means of evidence. For example, rules on witness evidence provide that whoever has an interest in the case that entitles him/her to join the trial may not testify.

The parties can avail themselves of the support of experts.

These experts are not generally called to testify, but prepare written reports which are filed in court by the relevant party.

While these reports are not considered formal evidence, they serve as technical arguments supporting the party’s claims or defences.

When appropriate, the court may, at its discretion, appoint court-appointed experts, which serve as assistants to the judge. These experts conduct investigations as directed by the court and provide necessary clarifications to the judge. Generally, court-appointed experts are selected from individuals registered in specialised professional registers. When the court appoints such an expert, each party is entitled to engage their own experts to provide additional perspectives.

Civil hearings are generally not open to the public, except for the hearing dedicated to the discussion of the case. Even in such instances, the court may decide to hold the hearing in private to safeguard security, public order, or morality. During each hearing, the clerk, under the judge’s supervision, records the minutes.

The Judge’s Power to Direct the Hearing

The hearing is directed by the judge. The judge’s power to direct the hearing is part of the broader power to direct the whole proceedings. Such direction is both formal and substantial.

Formal direction

The direction is formal because it concerns powers relating to the management of each phase of the trial (such as carrying out preliminary verifications, setting hearings, imposing deadlines, taking evidence, and issuing the judgment).

Substantial direction

The direction is substantial as the judge has supplementary powers in determining the subject matter of the trial, pursuing the settlement of the case, gathering evidence and taking evidence on his/her own initiative.

The Decision Phase

The judgment is filed by the court within 60 days (30 days in certain cases) after the hearing for submission of the case to the decision phase.

Each party may ask for the oral discussion of the case; in this case, the court may issue the judgment at the end of the hearing set for discussion.

The typical duration of civil cases in commercial disputes is:

• before a court of first instance: from three to five years;
• before a court of appeal: from two to five years; and
• before the Supreme Court of Cassation: from two to five years.

The duration can be shorter when simplified proceedings are carried out (please see 7.1 Trial Proceedings).

Court approval is not required to settle a lawsuit, except in certain matters (eg, employment matters).

The settlement of a lawsuit can remain confidential (unless one of the parties needs to enforce it in court). In addition, in certain cases the judge can order the disclosure of the terms of settlement (eg, in multiparty litigation when only some of the parties settle, the judge can order the disclosure of the settlement to determine its impact, if any, on the claims against the remaining defendants).

If a party does not comply with its obligations under the settlement agreement, the latter can be enforced as follows:

• If the plaintiff does not comply with its obligation to abandon the case, the defendant can file the settlement in court to have the case declared closed.
• If the defendant does not comply with its obligation to pay the settlement amount, the plaintiff can seek an order for payment against the defendant (or, if the settlement agreement meets certain requirements, can initiate an enforcement action (eg, a seizure or garnishment) against the plaintiff).

The settlement agreement has binding force between the parties.

It can be set aside under the general rules applicable to the termination of agreements, subject to certain exceptions. For example, if the settlement agreement replaced and superseded previous agreements, the settlement can only be terminated for breach of contract if this has been expressly provided for in the same agreement.

In addition, the law provides for special cases when the settlement agreement can be set aside. For example, under certain circumstances, the settlement agreement can be set aside if documents discovered after the settlement was entered into prove that one of the parties did not have any right.

The awards available to a successful litigant at a full trial stage are:

• the establishment of the right claimed by the successful litigant;
• an order to the losing party to pay a sum of money, to deliver something to the successful litigant or to act or refrain from acting; and
• a so-called “constitutive” judgment, which creates, modifies or extinguishes legal relationships between the parties, their heirs and successors in title.

General Principles

In the case of both contractual and non-contractual liability, damages must include both the loss suffered (eg, the costs and expenses borne) by the aggrieved party and the loss of profit that is an immediate and direct consequence of the non-performance, delay in performance or tort.

In Italy, damages are governed by the following principles:

• If the precise amount of the damage cannot be determined, it shall be assessed by the court on an equitable basis.
• If the creditor’s fault has contributed to the harm, the damages shall be reduced in accordance with the gravity of the creditor’s fault and the extent of the consequences resulting therefrom.
• Compensation is not due for damages that the aggrieved party could have avoided by using ordinary diligence.
• With reference only to contractual liability, where the non-performance or delay in performance was not due to the fault of the obligor, damages must be limited to the harm that could have been foreseen at the time the obligation arose.

Clauses on Limitation of Liability

Pursuant to the Civil Code, any agreement that excludes or limits the liability of the debtor in advance on the grounds of wilful misconduct or gross negligence is null and void. Furthermore, any covenant exempting or limiting liability in cases where the act of the debtor or its vicarious agents constitutes a breach of obligations arising from public policy rules is also null and void.

The Penalty Clause

The aggrieved party and the obligor may agree that, in the event of non-performance or delay in performance, one of them shall be liable to the other for a specific performance. Such an agreement has the effect of limiting the damages to that performance, if no further harm has been agreed upon. Such a penalty is due irrespective of proof of damages.

Punitive Damages

Punitive damages are not regulated by the Italian legal system. The Court of Cassation (the Italian Supreme Court) recently affirmed the decision of a court of appeal recognising a foreign judgment containing an order to pay punitive damages, holding that: (i) damages, in addition to their compensatory function, also have a deterrent and punitive function; and (ii) punitive damages are not incompatible per se with the Italian legal system, provided that certain requirements are met (eg, that punitive damages are expressly provided for by the applicable foreign law, and such a foreign law provides for the specific cases when the punitive damages can be awarded).

Pre-judgment Interest

The successful party is generally entitled to collect interest based on the period before judgment is entered if the claim is for payment of an existing debt.

Pre-judgment interest is calculated by applying: (i) the interest rate agreed between the parties; or, if the parties did not agree on an interest rate, (ii) the interest rate established by the law for late payments in commercial transactions or (iii) the general interest rate established by the law in all other cases (also in these other cases, the interest rate in (ii) above applies after the legal action is started).

The successful party is generally not entitled to collect interest based on the period before judgment is entered in case of claim for damages, in which case the judge usually determines the amount of damages on the date of the judgment.

According to the Civil Code, the limitation period to claim interest is five years.

Post-judgment Interest

The successful party is generally entitled to collect interest accruing after judgment is entered.

According to the Civil Code, the limitation period to claim interest is five years.

The general rule is that first instance judgments are immediately enforceable even pending an appeal (unless the appellate judge orders a stay). In exceptional cases (eg, in case of “constitutive” judgments), the enforcement is only possible when the judgments become res judicata.

Enforcement of a domestic judgment must be preceded by a formal request to the debtor to comply with the judgment within ten days, warning him that, failing that, enforcement will be levied.

The Code of Civil Procedure provides for three enforcement mechanisms:

• the expropriation of the debtor’s money or property (including the garnishment of the debtor’s bank account);
• enforcement by delivery or release of a specific movable or immovable property; and
• enforcement of obligations to act or refrain from acting.

EU Member States

The recognition in Italy of judgments issued by a court of an EU member state is governed by Brussels Recast.

Brussels Recast provides that judgments delivered in another member state are automatically recognised without the need for an ad hoc procedure.

The notion of “judgment” referred to in Brussels Recast includes provisional and protective measures issued by an authority that has jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter. Provisional and protective measures issued without the defendant being summoned to appear are excluded unless the judgment has been served on the defendant prior to enforcement.

Brussels Recast has extended the abolition of the exequatur system to the enforcement stage. Consequently, a judgment given in a member state and enforceable there is automatically enforceable in the other member states without the need for a declaration of enforceability by the national court.

Non-EU States

Italy is a signatory to the following international conventions:

• the Hague Choice of Courts Convention of 30 June 2005;
• the Lugano Convention dated 30 October 2007 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters; and
• the Hague Convention concluded on 2 July 2019 on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in civil or commercial matters, entered into force on 1 September 2023.

In the absence of existing conventions between Italy and the foreign country, the recognition and enforcement in Italy of judgments and orders issued by authorities of non-EU states, are governed by the rules laid down by Law No 218 of 31 May 1995 (Reform of the Italian system of private international law).

According to this law, a foreign judgment is automatically recognised in Italy in the following cases:

• The court that pronounced it had jurisdiction consistent with the principles of jurisdiction recognised under Italian law.
• The writ was brought to the defendant’s attention and the defendant’s essential rights of defence were not violated.
• The parties have entered an appearance according to the law of the place where the trial was held or the default has been declared in accordance with that law.
• It has become res judicata according to the law of the place where it was pronounced.
• It is not contrary to any other final judgment of an Italian court.
• There is not a trial pending before an Italian court on the same subject matter and between the same parties, which commenced before the foreign trial.
• Its provisions do not produce effects contrary to public order.

Since the judgment is automatically recognised in Italy, checking the above conditions for recognisability of the foreign judgment is generally possible but not compulsory. However, an application to ascertain the requirements for recognition is necessary: (i) when the debtor does not comply with the judgment and the creditor intends to enforce it, and (ii) when the debtor challenges the recognition of the foreign judgment.

The following levels of appeal and mechanisms of review are available to a litigant party:

• appeal to a court of appeal;
• appeal to the Supreme Court of Cassation;
• appeal against decisions on the proper venue;
• third-party opposition; and
• revocation.

The third-party opposition and, in certain cases, the revocation are “extraordinary appeals” because they can also be brought against judgments which are res judicata.

Appeal

An appeal may be brought against a judgment delivered by a court of first instance. The appellant may ask the relevant court of appeal to re-examine in whole or in part the dispute decided at first instance, but cannot bring new claims or raise new defences.

Appeal to the Supreme Court of Cassation

Decisions rendered by a court of appeal and, in certain cases, decisions rendered by a court of first instance, may be challenged before the Supreme Court of Cassation on the following grounds only:

• violation of the rules on jurisdiction or on proper venue;
• violation or misapplication of the rules of law (and national collective labour contracts and agreements);
• nullity of the judgment or proceedings; and
• failure to examine a fact that is decisive for the case and was discussed between the parties.

Appeal Against Decisions on the Proper Venue

This special appeal is used to resolve conflicts concerning the proper venue between two or more courts. It is brought directly before the Court of Cassation.

Revocation

Judgments rendered by a court of appeal (and, in certain cases, by a court of first instance) may be challenged by way of revocation if:

• they are the result of fraud committed by one party against the other party;
• they were based on evidence that was recognised or declared false after the judgment or that the losing party was unaware of having been recognised or declared false before the judgment;
• after the judgment, one or more decisive documents were found that the party had not been able to submit in court due to force majeure or due to the other party’s actions;
• they are the effect of an error of fact resulting from the acts and documents in the case;
• the judgment is contrary to another previous judgment which is res judicata between the parties, provided that it did not rule on the relevant objection; and
• the judgment is the result of the judge’s fraud, which has been ascertained in a final judgment.

The recent Cartabia Reform has introduced a new case of revocation (subject to certain conditions) against final judgments whose content has been declared by the European Court of Human Rights to be contrary to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms or one of its Protocols.

Third-Party Opposition

Third-party opposition may be brought:

• by a third party if the judgment prejudices its rights; and
• by successors and creditors of one of the parties when the judgment is the result of fraud or collusion to their detriment.

The appeal against a judgment delivered by a court of first instance must be brought by a writ of summons within:

• 30 days after service of the judgment; or
• six months from the publication of the judgment.

The party against whom the appeal is brought must enter an appearance twenty days before the first hearing and, if it also wants to appeal the judgment, it must submit a cross-appeal.

The decision stage may be:

• simplified (if the appeal is inadmissible, manifestly ill-founded or manifestly well-grounded or when it is appropriate because of the reduced complexity of the case or the urgency of its decision), in which case the investigating judge sets a hearing for the oral discussion before him/her; or
• ordinary (if the requirements for the simplified one do not apply), in which case the investigating judge sets a hearing before him/her to refer the case for decision to the full bench, assigning the parties a deadline for the submission of three additional written briefs.

The judgment delivered by the appeal court replaces the judgment delivered by the court of first instance.

A court of appeal carries out a new examination of the merits of a case but within the limits of the parts of the judgment appealed by the appellant (and cross-appellant, if any). The judgment delivered by the court of appeal replaces the one delivered by the court of first instance.

The appellant may not submit new claims and objections, or submit new evidence and file new documents, unless he/she proves that he/she could not submit or produce them in the proceedings at first instance for reasons not attributable to him/her. 

Courts cannot impose conditions on granting an appeal.

A court of appeal may:

• issue a judgment on the merits, confirming or modifying, in whole or in part, the first instance decision; or
• not decide on the merits and refer the parties back to the court of first instance if:
1. it declares the service of the summons null and void;
2. it finds that a party was not joined in the proceedings at first instance or that a party was wrongly excluded from the proceedings at first instance; or
3. it declares the first instance judgment null and void for failure to sign the judgment.

Each party shall provisionally bear its own costs of litigation, such as court fees, expenses and attorney’s fees.

In the judgment, the judge must order the losing party to reimburse the prevailing party for the costs of the litigation. In exceptional cases, the judge can derogate from this principle and reduce or exclude the losing party’s obligation to reimburse the prevailing party’s costs.

The amount of costs that the losing party is ordered to reimburse is determined by the law and does not equal (and is generally lower than) the actual costs of litigation borne by the prevailing party.

The order to pay costs is contained in the judgment of the court, so it can be challenged by ordinary means of appeal.

As explained in 11.1 Responsibility for Paying the Costs of Litigation, the amount of litigation costs that the losing party is ordered to reimburse the prevailing party is determined by the law on the basis of several criteria, such as the value of claims, the level of the courts (court of first instance, court of appeal, Supreme Court), the activity performed and conduct of the parties during the proceedings.

Interest is generally not awarded on costs, but the creditor can claim them under the general rules.

Please see the Italy Trends & Developments chapter in this guide.

Please see the Italy Trends & Developments chapter in this guide.

Please see the Italy Trends & Developments chapter in this guide.

Arbitration in Italy is regulated by the Code of Civil Procedure. In particular, the parties may agree to have disputes arising between them decided by one or more arbitrators. In particular, the parties may agree to resort to arbitration by:

• an arbitration clause inserted in a contract;
• an arbitration agreement whereby the parties agree that future disputes concerning one or more specified non-contractual relationships shall be decided by arbitrators; or
• a compromise – ie, a contract concerning a dispute that has already arisen.

There are two types of arbitration:

• formal arbitration that results in an arbitration award producing the same effects as a court judgment; and
• informal arbitration that results in an award with only contractual effects.

A recently introduced rule provides that the parties may grant the arbitrators the power to grant provisional measures.

Certain subject matters cannot be referred to arbitration, the most significant of which are disputes concerning non-disposable rights.

Individual labour disputes may be referred to arbitration only in the cases expressly provided for by law or in collective labour contracts or agreements.

The parties can challenge an arbitral award on the ground of “nullity” in the following cases:

• if the arbitration agreement is invalid, provided that the relevant objection has been raised in a timely manner during the proceedings;
• if the arbitrators have not been appointed according to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, provided that the relevant objection has been raised during the proceedings;
• if the award has been rendered by a person who could not be appointed as an arbitrator;
• if the award exceeds the scope of the arbitration agreement provided that the relevant objection has been raised during the proceedings or if the award decides the merits of the dispute when the merits could not be decided;
• if the award does not have the requirements set out by law;
• if the award has been rendered after the expiration of the time limit, provided that the party’s intention to challenge the award on this ground has been notified to the other parties and to the arbitrators before the issuing of the award;
• if the formalities required by the parties – under express sanction of nullity – have not been complied with and nullity has not been cured;
• if the award is contrary to a previous award or judgment having force of res judicata between the same parties, provided that said award or court decision has not been brought to the attention of the arbitrators during the proceedings;
• if the principle of due process has not been observed during the arbitration proceedings;
• if the award concludes the arbitral proceedings without deciding the merits of the dispute and the merits had to be decided;
• if the award contains contradictory provisions; or
• if the award failed to issue a decision on some of the claims and objections falling under the scope of the arbitration agreement.

The award may be appealed on the ground of violation of rules of law relating to the merits of the case only if expressly provided for by the parties or by law. In case of violation of rules of public policy, the appeal is always allowed.

Arbitration awards can also be subject to revocation and third-party opposition (please see 10.1 Levels of Appeal or Review to a Litigation and 10.2 Rules Concerning Appeals of Judgments).

Domestic Arbitration

In order to render the arbitral award enforceable, the interested party shall file a motion with the competent court of first instance. The court, having ascertained the formal regularity of the award, shall declare it enforceable. 

Foreign Arbitration

A party wishing to enforce a foreign award in Italy shall file a motion with the competent court of appeal.

The president of the court of appeal shall ascertain the formal regularity of the award and declare it immediately enforceable unless:

• the dispute could not be subject to compromise under Italian law; or
• the award contains provisions contrary to public policy.

The provisions on dispute resolution were subject to a major reform (the so-called Cartabia Reform) in 2023.

The two main areas of growth for commercial disputes are supply-chain disputes, in particular in the automotive and logistic sectors, energy disputes (both oil and gas), and clean energy disputes.