Reform of Quantum Debeatur: Judgment No. 16664 of 2024 and Implications for Forced Execution

The recent Ordinance No. 16664 of June 14, 2024, issued by the Court of Appeal of Venice, provides important clarifications regarding the consequences of the appeal concerning the quantum debeatur in matters of forced execution. The case at hand, involving B. (M. G.) and F. (R. M.), highlights how amendments to first-instance judgments influence not only the enforcement title but also the entire enforcement procedure.

The Consequences of the Reform of Quantum Debeatur

According to the maxim of the judgment, the appeal reform of the sole quantum debeatur established by the first-instance judgment has different consequences depending on whether the modification is an increase or a decrease. This aspect is crucial for understanding how creditors should act in both situations.

  • Increase Modification: When the quantum debeatur increases, the creditor must necessarily intervene, for the residual part, based on the new enforcement title constituted by the judgment of appeal.
  • Decrease Modification: Conversely, if the modification is a decrease, the substitutive effect of the title allows the enforcement process to continue uninterrupted, maintaining the effectiveness of previously executed acts, within the limits set by the new judgment.
Enforcement title - Judgment - Appeal reform of the sole quantum debeatur - Consequences for forced execution - Increase modification - Creditor's intervention for the residual part based on the new title - Necessity - Decrease modification - Substitutive effect of the title - Continuation of the enforcement process - Limits. In terms of enforcement title, the appeal reform of the sole quantum debeatur established by the first-instance judgment, which initiated the forced execution, results in different consequences within the enforcement procedure depending on whether the modification occurs as an increase or a decrease: in the first case, to expand the subject matter of the already initiated enforcement procedure, the creditor must intervene, for the residual part, based on the new enforcement title constituted by the judgment of appeal; in the second case, by virtue of the substitutive effect (with ex tunc effectiveness) of the title, the enforcement process continues seamlessly, within the limits set by the judgment of appeal, with persistent effectiveness, within those limits, of previously executed acts.

Relevant Legislation and Jurisprudence

The judgment is based on provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, particularly Articles 474 and 336, which govern the enforcement title and the effectiveness of judgments in the event of an appeal. Previous jurisprudence, as highlighted in maxims No. 2406 of 1986 and No. 29021 of 2018, provides a useful framework for interpreting the consequences of modifications to the quantum debeatur.

Conclusions

In summary, Judgment No. 16664 of 2024 represents an important reference point for legal professionals and creditors involved in enforcement procedures. The distinction between the consequences of modifying the quantum debeatur as an increase or a decrease allows for more effective management of enforcement actions, ensuring a clear understanding of the responsibilities and rights at stake. It is crucial for creditors to take timely action in the event of an increase in the enforcement title, while in the case of a decrease, they may continue the existing execution, within the limits established by the new judgment.

Bianucci Law Firm