Assisted Negotiation and Inadmissibility: Analysis of Order No. 186 of 2025

The recent Order No. 186 of January 7, 2025, issued by the Court of Appeal of Ancona, has sparked extensive debate in the legal field, as it addresses crucial issues regarding the assisted negotiation procedure. This order provides an important clarification on how assisted negotiation, as outlined in Article 3 of Legislative Decree No. 132 of 2014, interacts with claims for damages from road traffic accidents and requests for payment orders.

The Regulatory Context

Article 3 of Legislative Decree No. 132 of 2014 establishes that the assisted negotiation procedure is a condition of admissibility for certain types of disputes. In particular, the ruling clarifies that this procedure is necessary for both claims for damages from road traffic accidents and for requests for payment not exceeding fifty thousand euros. This approach aims to facilitate the resolution of disputes and to reduce the burden on the courts.

Analysis of the Order

In the specific case addressed by the order, the Court highlighted that if inadmissibility was timely raised in the first instance regarding one of the two types of disputes, this objection cannot subsequently be reintroduced on appeal for the other. This aspect sets a clear limit on the possibility of asserting inadmissibility and emphasizes the importance of timely management of procedural issues.

Assisted negotiation procedure - Condition of admissibility - Scope - Article 3, Legislative Decree No. 132 of 2014 - Timely objection of inadmissibility related to a claim for damages from road traffic accidents - Assertion on appeal of the inadmissibility of the request for payment - Inadmissibility - Basis. The assisted negotiation procedure is a condition of admissibility, pursuant to Article 3 of Legislative Decree No. 132 of 2014, for both claims for damages from road traffic accidents and for requests for payment not exceeding fifty thousand euros, which represent two distinct and independent types of disputes, with the consequence that, if inadmissibility has been timely raised in the first instance concerning one of them, the same objection made, with the appeal grounds, regarding the other must be considered late.

Practical Implications

The implications of this order are multiple:

  • Need for a clear procedural strategy from the outset of the dispute.
  • Importance of adhering to deadlines for raising objections.
  • Clarity on the distinction between different types of disputes.

In summary, Order No. 186 of 2025 represents an important step forward in understanding and applying assisted negotiation in the context of claims for damages from road traffic accidents. Legal practitioners must pay attention to such rulings to ensure proper management of disputes and to avoid incurring inadmissibility of claims.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the analyzed order not only clarifies fundamental procedural aspects but also invites reflection on the importance of timeliness and precision in the context of assisted negotiation. Adhering to rules and procedures is essential to ensure the effectiveness of one's requests in judicial proceedings.

Bianucci Law Firm