Order No. 18485 of 2024: Mandatory Mediation and its Conditions of Admissibility

The recent order of the Court of Cassation, No. 18485 of July 8, 2024, offers important clarifications regarding mandatory mediation, a procedure that has taken on a central role in the Italian legal landscape. The ruling addresses the issue of the condition of admissibility of mediation, establishing that this condition is considered met when one or both parties declare their unavailability to proceed at the end of the first meeting with the mediator.

The Regulatory Context of Mandatory Mediation

Legislative Decree No. 28 of 2010 introduced mandatory mediation in Italy for certain types of disputes, as indicated in Article 5, paragraph 1-bis. This instrument aims to promote out-of-court dispute resolution, alleviating the burden on courts and encouraging parties to reach an agreement. However, to initiate legal action, it is essential for parties to demonstrate that they have attempted mediation.

• Mediation is mandatory for disputes in civil and commercial matters.
• The first meeting with the mediator is crucial for determining the parties' willingness to proceed.
• Communicating unavailability to continue is sufficient to satisfy the condition of admissibility.

The Meaning of the Ruling and the Importance of the First Meeting

Mandatory mediation procedure pursuant to Legislative Decree No. 28 of 2010 - Condition of admissibility - Fulfillment - Conditions - Factual situation. The condition of admissibility of mandatory mediation, provided for by Legislative Decree No. 28 of 2010 for disputes in the matters indicated by Article 5, paragraph 1-bis, of the same decree (as introduced by Decree-Law No. 69 of 2013, converted, with amendments, into Law No. 98 of 2013), is met if one or both parties communicate their unavailability to proceed further at the end of the first meeting before the mediator. (In this case, the Supreme Court confirmed the appealed judgment which had rejected the plea of inadmissibility for failure to carry out mediation on the grounds that, after the mediator's invitation to express themselves on the possibility of starting the mediation procedure, the parties did not dwell on procedural or formal aspects but entered into the merits of the dispute, illustrating their respective positions).

The Court confirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal of Salerno, which had rejected the plea of inadmissibility for failure to carry out mediation, emphasizing that the parties, despite not having formally completed the procedure, had directly confronted each other on the merits of the issue. This aspect is crucial, as it highlights how dialogue between the parties, even in the absence of an agreement, can constitute a significant step in the mediation process.

Conclusions

In summary, Order No. 18485 of 2024 represents an important step forward in the understanding and application of mandatory mediation in Italy. It clarifies that the parties' unavailability to proceed beyond the first meeting is sufficient to satisfy the conditions of admissibility, thus avoiding excessive formalism that could hinder dispute resolution. This jurisprudential trend encourages parties to focus on the substance of the conflict rather than procedural technicalities, fostering a more collaborative and less confrontational approach to dispute resolution.