YOUR
Search

    14.05.2016

    How should the European concept of res judicata be applied?


    This issue is currently being addressed by the ‘Corte d’Appello’ of Ancona. A decision is  expected soon.

     

    The case concerns a judgement of a Munich Court which, on the facts, denied an actor’s claim for damages, finding, in interim, that the contract on which the actor’s claim was based is void.

     

    In the action before the Ancona Court, the actor tries to take advantage of the German judgement, as far as the invalidity of that contract is concerned.

     

    The problem here is that the German Court had stated that the contract was void only as a preliminary point. Because of the absence of any specific claim of the parties related to the validity of the contract the invalidity has not been taken into consideration in the operative part of the German ruling, but it is only mentioned in the reasoning as a ground leading to the decision. At this point, the following question arises: is the German Court’s statement about the validity  of the contract enforceable in a subsequent Italian trial?

     

    The Italian Supreme Court (n. 10853/2014) – referring to Articles 32 and 33 of Regulation 44/2001 EU – has stated that the Court ad quem, in order to decide whether a statement has legal force or not, must refer to the effective concept of res judicata of the country in which the judgement was pronounced.

    As far as the German national legal system is concerned – according to § 322 ZPO – only the operative part of the judgement (der Urteilstenor) is enforceable as res judicata. The reasoning and the grounds which lead to the decision don’t have any legal force.

     

    The problem is that there is an autonomous European concept of res judicata in EU law. The European Court of Justice decision in Gothaer (ECJ 15.11.2012, C 456-11) shows clearly that the European concept of res judicata includes both the operative part and the grounds which represent the ratio decidendi of the judgement.

     

    This approach could lead the Court of Ancona to a progressive decision, which would take into consideration the ratio decidendi of the German judgement, which seems strictly related and inseparable to the operative part.

     

    If Ancona is to decide on this basis it would represent a further step towards a common European judicial space, inspired by the principle of mutual trust between the member states.

     

     

    Luigi Ardizzone e Francesco Follieri new Partners of ADVANT Nctm
    ADVANT NCTM STRENGHTENS THE LINK BETWEEN PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE AND ACADEMIA:…
    Read more
    CJEU | Restriction of the Freedom of Establishment by Legislation on Applicable Law in Corporate Matters
    Art. 49 and 54 TFEU, Recital 2 of Directive (EU) 2019/2121 of the European…
    Read more
    Law firms Nctm and La Scala with UniCredit create UniQLegal, a joint-stock company between lawyers
    UniQLegal, www.uniqlegal.it,  is an innovative initiative created to meet some UniCredit Group’s specific needs for legal services, with particular regard to the management of disputes against banks and…
    Read more
    Drafting techniques: from recent case-law contributions on risk of inadmissibility of deeds with the Supreme Court to the incentives under Ministerial Decree 37/2018
    The recent reforms addressing proceedings before the Supreme Court devote  a great deal of attention to drafting techniques, since the strengthening of procedural filters, in accordance with the…
    Read more
    The fate of debts and receivables in the company voluntarily wiped out
    A recent ruling of the Court of Rome stated that in case of voluntary winding-up of a company carried out during a proceeding introduced by the same company, it is presumed that this one has tacitly waived…
    Read more
    Precautionary protection of the right to honour and reputation in light of the principle of inadmissibility of precautionary measures equivalent to seizure of the press under Article 21, paragraph 3, of the Italian Constitution
    In the event of online press articles causing damage to honour and reputation, without prejudice to the prohibition of precautionary measures having equivalent effect to seizure of the press, the victim…
    Read more
    The liability of Internet hosting providers for content published by third parties: the Wikipedia case
    Judgment No. 1065 of 19 February 2018 of the Court of Appeals of Rome deserves special mention for being one of the few judgements dealing with the topic of Internet hosting provider liability for online…
    Read more
    Creditor’s clawback action against the family trust. Is the family trust slowly fading?
    With the final judgement no. 3641/2018 the Italian Supreme Court has ruled on the creditor’s right to undertake the clawback action against a family trust, which had been established by one of the…
    Read more
    The quota-holder of a limited liability company (“s.r.l.”) can effectively exercise its right of option on the capital increase by offsetting the relevant debt with his eventual credit towards the company which is subordinated pursuant to art. 2467 of the
    The Business Division of the Court of Rome, addressing – from what we can gather, for the first time – a topic little explored also among the Scholars, recently excluded that the quota-holder of a limited…
    Read more