Commentary on Ordinance No. 18367 of 2024: Opposition to Enforcement and Autonomy of the Grounds

The recent Ordinance No. 18367 of July 4, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides important insights on the topic of opposition to enforcement. In particular, the Court clarifies how each ground raised in the opposition proceedings constitutes an independent fact supporting the non-existence of the right to proceed, highlighting the importance of analyzing each issue raised separately.

The Legal Context

The central issue addressed in the ruling concerns the cessation of the subject matter of the dispute in relation to the non-executability of social shares. According to the Court, such cessation does not entail the absorption of issues related to the non-existence or ineffectiveness of the enforcement title. This is a crucial aspect, as it implies that even if one issue is resolved, others can still be evaluated independently.

In general. In the opposition to enforcement proceedings, each of the grounds raised constitutes a distinct and independent fact supporting the non-existence of the contested right to proceed, and therefore, the cessation of the subject matter of the dispute regarding the non-executability of social shares does not entail the absorption of the raised issues concerning the non-existence or ineffectiveness of the enforcement title, because the potential acceptance of such objections determines, upon becoming final, the effect of preventing any enforcement action based on the title, with further consequences, regarding litigation costs, of a possible reciprocal defeat between the parties.

The Implications of the Ruling

This ruling has several practical implications for lawyers and their clients. Here are some key points:

  • Autonomy of the Grounds: Each ground of opposition must be examined independently, allowing for a more comprehensive evaluation of the parties' positions.
  • Effects on Enforcement: The acceptance of issues related to the non-existence of the enforcement title can prevent future enforcement actions, protecting the rights of debtors.
  • Cost Regime: The ruling clarifies that litigation costs may be subject to reciprocal defeat, an aspect that can influence the legal strategy to be adopted.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 18367 of 2024 from the Court of Cassation not only clarifies fundamental aspects of the opposition to enforcement process but also emphasizes the importance of a detailed and well-structured defense. Lawyers must pay attention to each ground presented in order to adequately protect the rights of their clients. The decision represents, therefore, an important legal precedent that could influence future legal strategies in the field of opposition to enforcement.

Bianucci Law Firm