This legal analysis discusses the jurisdiction of specialized business courts in Italy regarding challenges to surety bonds based on antitrust violations. The court determined that an objection to a surety bond's validity on antitrust grounds raised in opposition to a summary judgment isn't an independent claim.
Instead, such an objection is treated as a counter-argument to the opposing party's claim. Therefore, the judge handling the opposition to the summary judgment has the authority to decide on this matter. The specialized business court is not automatically involved unless other aspects of the surety bond's validity require its attention.
This decision is significant for clarifying jurisdictional procedures in Italian commercial law, particularly when dealing with disputes involving surety bonds and potential antitrust issues. The ruling emphasizes the procedural context of the challenge and its impact on the decision-making process.
L’eccezione di nullità della fideiussione per violazione della disciplina antitrust proposta in sede di opposizione a decreto ingiuntivo non dà luogo ad una autonoma domanda su cui il giudice deve decidere con effetto di giudicato, quanto ad una eccezione riconvenzionale finalizzata a parare la pretesa avversaria. Pertanto, poiché tale eccezione è decisa senza efficacia di giudicato, è competente a pronunciarsi sulla medesima il giudice dell’opposizione a decreto ingiuntivo e non il diverso giudice della Sezione specializzata in materia di imprese chiamato a decidere, eventualmente, sulla validità della fideiussione.
If you often open multiple tabs and struggle to keep track of them, Tabs Reminder is the solution you need. Tabs Reminder lets you set reminders for tabs so you can close them and get notified about them later. Never lose track of important tabs again with Tabs Reminder!
Try our Chrome extension today!
Share this article with your
friends and colleagues.
Earn points from views and
referrals who sign up.
Learn more