Standing to Appeal: Commentary on Order No. 17192 of 2024

In the Italian legal landscape, the issue of standing to appeal in the event of a company's deletion from the Companies' Register is of great importance. Order No. 17192 of June 21, 2024, represents a significant ruling by the Court of Cassation, which has reiterated some fundamental principles regarding active standing. Let's analyze the content of the ruling and its implications.

Context and Relevance of the Ruling

The legal case analyzed by the Court concerns an appeal filed by R. (M. L.) against F. (C. M.). The Court of Appeal of Rome, with a judgment of March 4, 2022, had declared the appeal inadmissible, raising questions about the appellant's standing. In particular, the Court emphasized that, in the event of a company's deletion from the Companies' Register during legal proceedings, standing to appeal belongs to the shareholder of the dissolved company.

It is essential for the shareholder to prove they have succeeded to the deleted company, by alleging and proving their status. The Cassation ruling confirmed this approach, highlighting that the absence of such proof can be raised ex officio.

Principles of Standing and Relevant Legislation

Based on the provisions of the order, the principles of active standing are founded on some fundamental provisions of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, including:

• Article 110: governs standing to sue.
• Article 299: deals with succession in proceedings.
• Article 2312 of the Civil Code: addresses the issue of shareholders' liability.

In general. In the event of a company's deletion from the Companies' Register during legal proceedings, standing to appeal belongs to the shareholder of the dissolved company, who is required to allege their capacity and provide proof thereof, the lack of which may be raised ex officio. (In this specific case, the Supreme Court confirmed the ruling of the territorial court which had excluded the appellant's standing to appeal, on the grounds that, in the notice of appeal, he had indicated he was acting as a shareholder and legal representative and not as a shareholder who had succeeded to the limited partnership (s.a.s.) deleted from the Companies' Register).

Conclusions

The ruling under examination offers an important clarification on the issue of standing to appeal in the event of a company's dissolution. It reiterates the need for shareholders to prove their status as successors, highlighting the importance of documentation and evidence in the context of civil proceedings. This principle not only ensures legal certainty but also protects the interests of all parties involved in the proceedings. In a period when legal regulations and practices are constantly evolving, this ruling proves crucial for lawyers and jurists operating in the field of civil and commercial law.