Asset protection in over-indebtedness: rules on appeals according to Ordinance no. 29918 of 2025

Managing over-indebtedness procedures requires a delicate balance between protecting the debtor in difficulty and ensuring efficiency and stability for creditors and third-party purchasers. With Ordinance no. 29918 of November 12, 2025, the Court of Cassation addressed a crucial issue regarding the liquidation of the assets of an over-indebted party, as regulated by Law no. 3 of 2012. The judges of legitimacy clarified the procedural rules applicable to this sensitive phase and the burdens placed on parties intending to challenge liquidation acts.

The Cassation's decision and the extension of the chamber proceedings

The case in question stems from an opposition filed by B. (M. B. D.) against F. (C. C.) within the scope of an insolvency liquidation procedure. The Supreme Court, confirming the decision of the Court of Appeal of Brescia, established that the rules of the chamber proceedings (rito camerale), provided for by articles 737 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure, apply not only to the initial phase of opening the procedure and forming the liabilities, but also to the entire asset liquidation phase governed by article 14-novies of Law no. 3 of 2012.

This means that any challenge raised by interested parties against liquidation acts must necessarily follow the path of the chamber appeal pursuant to article 739 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Here is the official legal principle (massima) expressed by the Supreme Court:

Regarding the liquidation of the assets of an over-indebted party pursuant to articles 14-ter et seq. of Law no. 3 of 2012, the chamber proceedings referred to in articles 737 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure apply, insofar as compatible, not only to the phases of opening the procedure and forming the liabilities—by virtue of the explicit reference to article 10, paragraph 6, contained, respectively, in the subsequent articles 14-quinquies, paragraph 1, and 14-octies, paragraph 3 of the same law—but also to the asset liquidation phase pursuant to article 14-novies of the aforementioned law, during which it is the burden of the interested parties to challenge any acts detrimental to their rights via an appeal under article 739 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in accordance with the general principles of efficiency of insolvency liquidation procedures and the stability of judicial sales, which also underlie article 2929 of the Civil Code and involve the protection of the successful bidder.

Stability of sales and the burden of appeal

The Cassation's ruling is of fundamental importance as it emphasizes the burden of timeliness placed on the parties. If a subject believes that a liquidation act infringes upon their rights, they cannot wait or use ordinary instruments, but must file an appeal within the peremptory deadline provided by the chamber proceedings. The reasons behind this procedural rigor are primarily two:

• Efficiency of the procedure: insolvency liquidations must be carried out in a rapid and certain manner, without suffering continuous halts due to late oppositions.
• Stability of judicial sales: in line with article 2929 of the Civil Code, the legal system protects the reliance of third-party successful bidders who purchase assets auctioned within the procedure.

Conclusions

Ordinance no. 29918 of 2025 of the Court of Cassation consolidates a trend aimed at ensuring legal certainty and the speed of over-indebtedness procedures. For professionals in the sector and for debtors, the need to constantly monitor every act of the liquidation clearly emerges, knowing that the only suitable instrument to assert any defects is a timely appeal under article 739 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Otherwise, the stability of the asset transfer prevails to protect the third-party purchaser.