The Court of Cassation on Consumer's Plea of Incompetence: Analysis of Order No. 12416/2025

Consumer protection, a cornerstone of our legal system, must be balanced with efficiency and legal certainty. The Court of Cassation, with Order No. 12416 of May 10, 2025, intervenes in this delicate balance. The ruling, presided over by Judge F. Manna and reported by Judge L. Cavallino, clarifies the limits of the plea of territorial incompetence for a consumer sued in "their forum."

The Consumer's Forum: Law and Clarified Limits

Article 33 of the Consumer Code (Legislative Decree 206/2005) identifies the consumer's place of residence or domicile as the competent forum, ensuring essential protection for the weaker party. Order No. 12416/2025 addresses a crucial question: can a consumer, already sued in "their forum," plead territorial incompetence, even invoking a derogatory contractual clause? The Court of Cassation has provided an unequivocal answer, reiterating the importance of balancing protection with procedural principles.

A consumer summoned to court in "their forum" cannot plead incompetence and the competence of other forums (in this case, due to a contractual derogatory clause) because the principle that the plaintiff chooses the competent forum applies, and otherwise, the consumer could always paralyze the opposing action by asserting the competence of a judge other than the one seized.

The maxim reiterates the plaintiff's right to choose the competent forum among those legally provided. If the consumer is sued in the forum that the Consumer Code assigns to them as "their own," they cannot invoke another competence. Clauses providing for a different forum are often unfair (Article 33, paragraph 2, letter u). The Court of Cassation prevents consumers from using a derogatory clause to shift competence away from a forum already in their favor. This approach prevents the instrumentalization of protection, avoiding the defendant paralyzing legal action and delaying justice.

A Consolidated Jurisprudential Orientation

This order aligns with consolidated jurisprudence, as evidenced by references to decisions No. 8406 of 2022 and No. 12981 of 2020. The Court of Cassation confirms that consumer protection cannot become a delaying tactic. The consumer's forum is an option for the plaintiff; if they exercise it, the defendant cannot evade it. The plea of incompetence serves to ensure that the case is heard by the legitimately seized judge, not to create uncertainty or delays. This balances the protection of the weaker party with the need for procedural speed.

• The consumer's forum is a specific protection.
• The plaintiff can choose among legally competent forums.
• If the consumer is sued in "their forum," they cannot plead incompetence.
• This also applies in the presence of derogatory clauses.
• The decision aims to prevent abuse and ensure speed.

Conclusions: Greater Clarity for Civil Proceedings

Order No. 12416 of 2025 offers important clarification on territorial competence in consumer disputes. It reinforces the principle that consumer protection, while fundamental, must be balanced with the plaintiff's freedom to choose the forum and the efficiency of the judicial system. For legal professionals, it is a reminder to carefully evaluate pleas. For consumers, it is a clear indication of the limits of a broad but not unlimited right. The Court of Cassation thus promotes legal certainty and a more streamlined management of civil disputes.