Order No. 18092 of 2024: Jurisdiction and Real Estate Mediation in the European Market

In the context of globalization and the increasing interconnection between European markets, the issue of jurisdiction in real estate transactions assumes a crucial role. Order No. 18092 of 2024 from the Italian Court of Cassation fits into this debate, clarifying the boundaries of jurisdiction concerning real estate mediation activities conducted via the Internet.

The Case Examined by the Court

The Court dealt with a case where an Italian real estate broker had published a sales offer in English on a website accessible to all member states of the European Union. The central issue was whether such activity could be considered directed towards the country of residence of an Austrian consumer, thus invoking the jurisdiction of the "consumer's forum" under EU Regulation No. 1215 of 2012.

  • Article 17, paragraph 1, letter c) of the Regulation states that jurisdiction may be attributed to the consumer's forum when the commercial activity is directed towards the consumer's state of residence.
  • The Court emphasized that mere accessibility of the online offer is not sufficient to determine that there is an activity directed towards another member state.
  • There must be forms of communication or advertising intentionally directed at that country.

Reflection on the Ruling's Principle

144/09 - for this purpose, it is necessary to use forms of communication or advertising intentionally directed, involving financial resources, to carry out the activity in a country different from that of the professional himself, while the aforementioned regulatory hypothesis must be excluded in the case of mere activity conducted via the internet, which by its nature is accessible in all countries regardless of the intention to target consumers from other states. (In this case, concerning a mediation contract concluded in Italy regarding a property located there, the Supreme Court confirmed the jurisdiction of the Italian judge, stating that the publication of the sales notice on a website did not constitute an activity of the mediator directed towards Austria - the state where the consumer was domiciled - even by reason of the use of the English language, which is the most widely used internationally and not the main language of that country).

The Court thus confirmed the jurisdiction of the Italian judge for real estate mediation, highlighting that mere online publication is not sufficient to establish an activity directed towards another state, unless there are evident marketing and communication efforts aimed at that specific market.

Conclusions

This order represents an important step forward in understanding jurisdiction in the field of real estate mediation, especially in a European context where online transactions are becoming increasingly common. It is essential for industry professionals to be aware of European and Italian regulations regarding jurisdiction to avoid potential legal conflicts and ensure effective management of international real estate transactions.

Bianucci Law Firm