art. 633 It. code civ. proc. Archivi

Arbitration and payment order

by Roberto Olivaart. 633 It. code civ. proc., art. 806 It. code civ. proc., art. 819/ter It. code civ. proc. 30 June 20228 July 2022No Comments

A recent decision issued by the Court of first instance of Vicenza (Court of first instance of Vicenza, decision No. 1102 of 27 June 2022, Italian text available here) is of great interest for the unprecedented conclusion reached by the Court.

Arbitration and order for payment

by Roberto Olivaart. 633 It. code civ. proc., art. 806 It. code civ. proc. 4 January 20178 January 20172 Comments

A recent decision issued by the Court of first instance of Rome (no. 24195 of 28 December 2016, Italian text available here) gives us the chance to examine an interesting topic: that concerning the relationship between arbitration and order for payment.

Arbitration clause and payment order

by Roberto Olivaart. 633 It. code civ. proc., art. 806 It. code civ. proc., art. 808 It. code civ. proc. 31 October 201519 July 2016No Comments

It is quite usual that, when inserting an arbitration clause in an agreement, a party would like to preserve its right to file with the Court a request for a payment order (which is an ex parte order). The purpose would be to attain a temporarily enforceable payment order, since it would be an effective and fast solution to protect its rights.

Nonetheless, the outcomes of such choice could be different from those expected. The VI Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, in its order no. 21666 of 23 October 2015 (Italian text available here), analysed the possible consequences.

Waiver of the right to arbitrate

by Roberto Olivaart. 633 It. code civ. proc., art. 806 It. code civ. proc., art. 808 It. code civ. proc., art. 819/ter It. code civ. proc. 7 October 201524 July 2016No Comments

The Court of first instance of Rome (decision no. 19215 of 28 September 2015, Italian text available here) ruled in a complex case concerning the relationship between a limited liability company and its former director. First of all, the company sued the former director before the Court, claiming his liability. In a second case (the case of the decision at hand), the former director requested the Court to issue a payment order against the company, in order to obtain the amounts allegedly owed to him. The parties did not take into account the arbitration clause stipulated in Article 26 of the Articles of association. This provision notes that “all controversies arising among the quotaholders or among the quotaholders and the company, the directors, liquidators and statutory auditors shall be settled by a sole arbitrator appointed by the President of the Certified Public Accountants Register of the place where the company has its registered office (….).” In the judicial proceedings commenced by the company, the former director objected that the Court did not have jurisdiction, due to the above mentioned arbitration clause. On its turn, the company raised this objection when challenging the payment order issued in favour of the former director.

Did the parties waive their right to arbitrate, by initiating Court proceedings?