Italy has consolidated its reputation as a pro-arbitration jurisdiction. Its arbitration legal framework is substantially aligned with the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law. State courts support arbitration. Arbitration institutions, such as the Milan Chamber of Arbitration (CAM), have a strong experience in administering domestic and international arbitrations. Combined they create a streamlined procedure providing a service aligned with international standards.

1.1 Advantages

The main advantages are the following:

• Party autonomy allowing the selection of the arbitrators (high specialisation, based on the subject matter of the dispute) as well as the possibility to adapt the rules of the proceedings.
• Efficiency and speed.
• Cost-effectiveness compared to court litigation, in the long term.
• Confidentiality, especially under CAM Rules.
• Effective and straightforward enforcement of arbitral awards.

1.2 Disadvantages and common pitfalls

High-stakes, complex disputes may not be as fast as expected, especially where technical experts are appointed.

Even if the grounds for setting arbitral awards aside are limited, the relevant court proceedings before the Court of Appeal may last a few years, due to the courts’ workload, and the same applies to the possible subsequent appeal before the Supreme Court.

In the case of ad hoc arbitrations, or where local arbitral institutions are involved (other than CAM), the expertise and familiarity with arbitration may vary and the experience in handling international cases may be limited. This may increase the duration and cost of arbitration.

1.3 Distinctive features

Main institutions, and CAM in particular, offer streamlined proceedings (simplified arbitrations) and more generally ensure an efficient management of arbitrations. A recent study commissioned by CAM to the SDA Bocconi School of Management compared the cost of arbitration in Italy with those of court disputes. The findings show that CAM arbitration is faster and more cost effective than ordinary civil litigation. On average, CAM arbitrations require 307 days, compared with 764 days for a first‑instance civil case and 597 days for an appeal.

Arbitration in Italy is a consolidated and preferred tool to solve disputes in the corporate, construction and energy space. In these areas, Italy offers experienced arbitrators and counsels and a substantial case law, ensuring predictability and reliability.

2.1 Legal framework

Italian arbitration law does not provide for specific rules applicable to international arbitration, which remains largely subject to the same set of rules applicable to domestic arbitration, with very limited exceptions, as far as the annulment of the award is concerned (in particular, differently from what happens for purely domestic awards, if one of the parties was a foreign resident at the time when the arbitration agreement was signed, in the case of annulment of the award, the Court of Appeal has the power to decide on the merits of the dispute only where this was explicitly provided for in the arbitration agreement or the parties jointly require the court to do so).

The relevant rules are set under Articles 806–840 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). This national framework operates alongside Italy’s adherence to major international conventions.

2.2 What qualifies under domestic law as “international arbitration”? Is there a specific statute?

There is no specific statute establishing when an arbitration should be qualified as international. In general terms, arbitration is considered “international” when the dispute involves at least one foreign element, such as the nationality of the parties, the law applicable to the underlying contract, and so on.

2.3 Ratification of the New York Convention

Italy ratified the New York Convention on 19 January 1968.

2.4 Ratification of the ICSID Convention

Italy ratified the ICSID Convention on 29 March 1971.

2.5 Other treaties relating to arbitration

Italy is also a party to the 1961 European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration (entered into force on 1 November 1970) and to the 1927 Geneva Convention on the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards (entered into force on 12 February 1931). Italy is also a contracting party to a number of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) with other countries, providing for alternative dispute mechanisms.

2.6 Choice of forum for intra-EU dispute settlement

Following the EU Court of Justice’s decision in the Achmea case, Italy signed the EU Agreement for the Termination of BITs between the Member States in 2022, thus intra-EU investor-states disputes are no longer subject to arbitration but must be resolved before state courts, as far as the BITs listed under Annex A of the Agreement are concerned.

2.7 Is the municipal law governing arbitration based on UNCITRAL Model Law?

No, it is not, but Italian arbitration law shares the same principles set under the UNCITRAL Model Law.

2.8 Recent amendments or reforms in arbitration laws

On 28 February 2023 a major reform of Italian civil procedural law entered into force, providing significant changes also to arbitration law, with respect to:

• arbitrators’ power to issue interim measures;
• strengthened guarantees of arbitrators’ independence and impartiality;
• immediate enforceability of the exequatur decree to foreign awards;
• reduction of the time limits for setting aside an award; and
• corporate arbitration.

3. Local arbitration institutions

Italy hosts a well-developed and increasingly active network of arbitral institutions administering commercial arbitrations. Most domestic institutions are connected to chambers of commerce or bar associations, and operate on the basis of autonomous arbitration rules, fee schedules and appointment mechanisms. The main institution, for both domestic and international arbitration, is CAM.

3.1 Presence of local arbitration institutions

CAM is widely regarded as the leading arbitral institution in Italy and the most internationally visible. Established within the Milan Chamber of Commerce, CAM administers both domestic and international arbitrations and is fully aligned with internationally recognised standards. From an institutional cooperation perspective, CAM has expanded its operational reach through agreements with other local chambers.

3.2 Does the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) have a local office?

No, it does not.

3.3 Does the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) have a local office?

No, it does not.

3.4 Does the ICC International Court of Arbitration have a local office?

The ICC has a National Committee in Italy, organising events and activities related to arbitration and alternative dispute resolution (ADR), but the International Court of Arbitration does not per se have a local office in Italy.

3.5 Does the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) have a local office?

No, it does not.

3.6 Agreement entered into with local offices of international arbitration institutions

Arbitrations conducted under the rules of international institutions and seated in Italy are administered directly by the respective institution and not by local offices. However, CAM has in place various partnership agreements, including with World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) for the promotion of the use of ADR options for international disputes involving at least one non-Italian party in the area of intellectual property (IP). Further partnerships are in place in the broader field of ADR and mediation with foreign institutions (e.g. the Paris Mediation and Arbitration Centre and the Istanbul Chamber of Commerce Arbitration Centre), aimed at promoting and facilitating cross-border dispute resolution mechanisms.

In the context of ad hoc arbitrations conducted under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, CAM offers a dedicated institutional service whereby CAM may, upon request of one or more parties: act as appointing authority; decide on challenges to arbitrators, in accordance with the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules; provide procedural and logistical support, including the organisation of hearings, assistance with communications and the provision of hearing facilities; and offer guidance on cost determination.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) opened two temporary offices in Milan (one for the CAS Ad hoc Division and one for the CAS Anti-Doping Division) in connection with the Olympic Winter Games Milano-Cortina 2026, to settle sports-related disputes for the Games and decide on anti-doping cases.

4.1 Requirements as to content and form

Under Italian law, arbitration agreements must be in writing (including email, fax or telegraph) and must be aimed at resolving disputes concerning disposable rights only. Article 809 of the CCP also requires the parties to select the arbitrators or their number (sole arbitrator or panel of arbitrators) and the criteria for their appointment.

4.2 Validity of arbitration agreements

Under Italian law, the arbitration agreement is separate from the main contract, so the contract’s invalidity does not automatically affect the arbitration agreement. However, if there is a lack of representative authority affecting both the contract and the arbitration agreement, both become ineffective. Likewise, the invalidity of the contract extends to the arbitration agreement when both share the same ground of nullity (e.g. illegality of cause). By contrast, if the defect relates only to the contract, the arbitration clause is not affected.

4.3 Special formalities

Under Article 838 bis of the CCP, arbitration clauses concerning corporate disputes are valid only if included in the company’s articles of association or byelaws.

According to Article 1341, paragraph 1, and Article 1342, paragraph 2 of the Italian Civil Code (CC), arbitration agreements included in standard contractual terms (general terms and conditions) or pre-established forms (set by one of the parties) must be expressly approved in writing by the party other than the one who drafted the document, in order to be valid.

4.4 Governing law

Unless the parties opted for a specific governing law in the arbitration agreement, Italian courts would establish the law applicable to the arbitration agreement based on applicable conflict of law rules (i.e. Rome I Regulation), thus the law of the country with which the arbitration agreement is most closely connected would apply. In general, such law is the law of the seat of arbitration.

5.1 Applicable restrictions

Parties may submit to arbitration all disputes except those involving:

• non‑disposable rights (i.e. rights that parties cannot freely waive or settle, such rights concerning the status and capacity of individuals, matrimonial relationships, the right to the integrity of the body or to the name, etc.); and
• matters that are non‑arbitrable due to statutory prohibitions, meaning that the subject matter must, by law, be decided exclusively by state courts (e.g. certain labour disputes, insolvency issues, etc.).

6.1 Stay of proceedings

Arbitral proceedings may be stayed only if:

• a party dies or loses legal capacity during the proceedings;
• criminal proceedings are pending in relation to the same facts and are relevant to the arbitral dispute;
• an issue that is not arbitrable arises and law requires that it to be resolved with a final judgment issued by state courts; or
• the arbitral tribunal refers a question to the Italian Constitutional Court.

Moreover, pursuant to Article 819 ter of the CCP, neither arbitral nor judicial proceedings must be suspended solely because the same dispute is pending before a different authority. Where arbitration and court proceedings continue in parallel, any conflict is resolved ex post through the principle of res judicata: the decision that becomes final first prevails.

6.2 Anti-suit injunctions

Italian courts do not have the power to grant anti-suit injunctions and they would not recognise and enforce anti-suit injunctions granted by foreign courts or arbitral tribunals.

Under Italian law, arbitral tribunals may be composed of either a sole arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators, depending on the choice made by the parties with the arbitration agreement, or the applicable institutional rules. Where the arbitration agreement provides for an even number of arbitrators, Italian law mandates judicial intervention: the competent president of the court of the seat of arbitration must appoint an additional arbitrator to ensure an odd-numbered tribunal and avoid deadlock.

7.1 Restrictions on the parties’ freedom to choose arbitrators

As a general rule, any natural person with full legal capacity (older than 18) may be appointed as arbitrator by the parties, who therefore enjoy broad autonomy in the appointment.

7.2 Requirement of arbitrator independence and impartiality

Italian arbitration law imposes strict duties of independence and impartiality on all arbitrators. These obligations apply throughout the entire arbitral process and are not limited to the time of appointment. The importance of these principles has been reinforced by the 2022 reform (Article 813, CCP), which introduced enhanced disclosure obligations and broadened the grounds for challenging arbitrators (Article 815, CCP).

7.3 Mandatory rules applicable to the appointment process

With the exception of certain special arbitrations (e.g. corporate arbitration), the appointment process is left to parties’ autonomy. When, under the arbitration agreement, arbitrators must be appointed by the parties, Article 810 of the CCP provides that the claimant shall notify the defendant in writing the name of the arbitrator appointed, inviting the other party to appoint another arbitrator within the following 20 days (unless the parties otherwise agreed). The arbitral tribunal shall then appoint the third arbitrator, acting as president of the arbitral tribunal (unless the parties opted for different appointment rules).

If the parties or the arbitral tribunal fail to appoint one or more arbitrator(s), each party may ask state courts to do it (see below).

Special rules apply to multiparty arbitrations. Indeed, Article 816 quater of the CCP provides mandatory mechanisms to ensure equality of arms, including:

• appointment of the entire tribunal by a third party;
• joint appointment by all parties; or
• a sequential mechanism allowing claimants to appoint arbitrators first, followed by a joint appointment by respondents.

If none of these mechanisms can be applied, proceedings must be split into separate arbitrations, unless Italian law requires the mandatory participation of all parties, in which case the arbitration is inadmissible.

As to corporate arbitrations, arbitration clauses contained in companies’ byelaws or articles of associations must defer the appointment of the entire arbitral tribunal to an independent third-party institution, otherwise the relevant arbitration agreement is null and void.

7.4 Appointment mechanism in the absence of party agreement or applicable institutional rules

Where the appointment of the arbitrators is not dealt with in the arbitration agreement (which may provide for appointment criteria, or simply defer to arbitration rules) or the relevant mechanism is not working (e.g. for inactivity of one of the parties), the other party may request the president of the court of first instance at the seat of the arbitration to make the relevant appointment. The president of the court shall make the appointment based on standards of “transparency, turnover and efficiency” (appointments are published on courts websites).

7.5 Mandatory rules applicable to the replacement process

Under Article 811 of the CCP, if an arbitrator is unable or unwilling to continue performing their mandate (other than in cases of removal), replacement must occur in accordance with the same rules governing the original appointment. Where these rules are absent or the designated appointing party fails to act, the president of the competent court intervenes pursuant to Article 810 of the CCP.

7.6 Mandatory disclosure obligations

Upon acceptance of the appointment, arbitrators must file a written declaration disclosing any circumstances that could give rise to doubts as to their independence or impartiality or confirming that no such circumstances exist (Article 813(1), CCP). Failure to submit a complete and accurate declaration exposes the arbitrator to removal, provided that the challenge is raised within the statutory time limit (10 days) from discovery of the relevant facts by the parties.

This obligation reflects a shift towards greater transparency and alignment with international arbitration practice.

7.7 Grounds for challenge

According to Article 815 of the CCP, arbitrators may be challenged, based on a range of grounds, including where they:

• lack the agreed or required qualifications;
• have a direct or indirect interest in the outcome of the dispute;
• have close personal, professional or familial relationships with a party, counsel or representative;
• are (or their spouses are) involved in parallel disputes or have serious personal conflicts with a party, its representative or counsel;
• maintain contractual or other relationships affecting independence and impartiality with a party, its representative or counsel; or
• previously acted as counsel, advisor or witness in the same dispute.

The 2022 reform introduced an additional, broadly framed ground allowing challenges based on serious reasons of convenience and opportunity that undermine the arbitrator’s independence and impartiality.

Parties remain free to expand the list of grounds for challenge by agreement or by reference to institutional rules.

7.8 Mandatory rules governing the challenge of arbitrators

In the absence of agreed institutional procedures, challenges must be submitted by way of application to the president of the court competent for arbitrator appointments pursuant to Article 810 of the CCP. The challenge must be filed within 10 days from the date on which the party becomes aware of the relevant ground.

The president of the competent court hears both the parties and the challenged arbitrator before issuing a final order, which may be reviewed only by the Italian Supreme Court, and solely on points of law.

7.9 Removal

Article 813 bis of the CCP provides a specific procedure for the removal of arbitrators who fail to perform their duties. The arbitrator may be replaced either by joint agreement of the parties or by the person or body that was entrusted by the parties with the arbitrator’s appointment. If neither of these situations occurs, each party may send a default notice to the arbitrator by registered mail requesting that action be taken within 15 days of receipt. Where such arbitrator remains inactive, either party may apply to the competent court to seek removal and replacement, as provided by Article 810 of the CCP.

The court assesses whether the alleged breach is substantiated and, if so, orders the arbitrator’s removal and replacement; otherwise, the application is dismissed.

7.10 Liability and immunity of arbitrators

For the purposes of shielding arbitrators from undue pressure in the performance of their adjudicatory function, Article 813 ter of the CCP grants them a significant degree of immunity. Arbitrators may be held liable only in limited circumstances, including:

• failure to perform or delayed performance of a due act which resulted in the arbitrator’s removal from office; resignation without cause; failure to deliberate the award, or its correction, within the applicable deadlines; commission of acts for which a magistrate could be held liable under Italian law; and
• if they have acted with wilful misconduct or gross negligence.

Liability is capped at triple the amount of the arbitrator’s fees, unless the misconduct was intentional. The above list of breaches does not, however, preclude the parties from bringing other types of claims, such as those arising from torts committed by the arbitrator(s) (e.g. fraudulent behaviour).

However, claims against arbitrators are inadmissible while arbitral proceedings are pending or unless the award has been set aside by a decision with res judicata effects on the same grounds on which the responsibility of the arbitrator(s) is predicated.

For arbitrations seated in Italy, courts may appoint arbitrators, grant interim measures where necessary, assist with taking evidence, and issue the exequatur to make the award enforceable, while any set‑aside action is heard by the Court of Appeal of the seat. For foreign‑seated arbitrations, judicial assistance is more limited and focuses mainly on urgent interim relief needed in Italy and on the recognition and enforcement of the foreign award.

8.1 Interim measures

8.1.1 Overview of interim measures

Under Italian law, interim measures may be issued either by state courts or — following the 2022 reform — by arbitral tribunals, provided that the parties have expressly conferred such powers to the arbitral tribunal. Thus, the arbitral tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction over interim measures when so empowered, while state courts retain competence until the tribunal is constituted.

8.1.2 Relevance of availability of emergency arbitrator mechanism

Italian law does not have any codified emergency arbitrator mechanism; before the arbitral tribunal is validly constituted, state courts have jurisdiction to grant interim measures.

Arbitration rules may provide an emergency arbitrator mechanism (e.g. CAM Rules); if the parties have referred to such rules, it is possible (but not compulsory) for a party to ask the emergency arbitrator for interim measures.

8.2 Taking of evidence

Arbitrators in Italy can provide for the appearance of witnesses or order the production of documents by the parties, but they lack the power to issue enforceable orders in connection thereto. However, arbitrators may request the competent Italian court to compel attendance of witnesses or order documents production failing spontaneous compliance.

8.3 Appointment or challenge of arbitrators

If the parties’ agreed appointment mechanism fails (e.g. a party defaults or the appointing authority is not operative), the Italian court designated by the CCP may appoint the missing arbitrators for arbitrations seated in Italy.

The competent court may revoke the arbitrator and appoint a substitute, ensuring the proper constitution of the tribunal and preventing the arbitration from stalling. This judicial power operates when the parties’ agreement is silent or incomplete and also when the party who should make the appointment fails to act.

8.4 Other available assistance

For arbitrations seated in Italy, state courts provide for the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards.

In case the parties do not agree with the arbitrators on the compensation due for being a member of the arbitral tribunal, any arbitrator may ask the president of the local court (determined by the seat of the arbitration) to settle the fees due.

9.1 Domestic scope of sovereign immunity from jurisdiction

It is generally understood (lacking any statutory provision) that the acceptance of an arbitration agreement implies a waiver of immunity from jurisdiction, which would extend to proceedings for the declaration of enforceability of the award.

9.2 Immunity from execution

Italian law provides specific restrictions for enforcing a judgement or an award towards the state, in particular, certain assets cannot be subject to enforcement (e.g. highways and railways, art galleries, beaches, rivers, weapons, buildings used as public offices, with their furniture).

Special rules apply to the enforcement of judgments or awards ordering the state or public bodies to pay a certain amount of money (e.g. Article 14 of Law Decree 669/1996 converted into Law 30/1997 sets a standstill period of 120 days in favour of the state and of its bodies).

Italian arbitration law grants the parties and the arbitral tribunal wide discretion in shaping the conduct of the proceedings. Article 816 bis of the CCP allows the parties to set in the arbitration agreement the rules applicable to the procedure and the language of the arbitration. Failing this, the arbitral tribunal is free to establish the procedural rules, subject to mandatory principles of due process. At a minimum, arbitral proceedings must comply with the fundamental guarantees of adversarial proceedings and the right of defence.

In particular, Italian law requires that each party be given:

• a genuine opportunity to present its case;
• the possibility to submit written submissions and evidence;
• the right to respond to the opposing party’s arguments and evidence; and
• the opportunity to address any factual or legal issues raised by the tribunal on its own initiative.

Italian arbitration law does not contain a general statutory rule imposing confidentiality on arbitral proceedings. Confidentiality in Italian-seated arbitrations does not arise automatically by operation of law, but rather from a combination of professional obligations, contractual arrangements and institutional rules.

Italian lawyers acting as counsel or arbitrators are bound by strict duties of professional secrecy. Breaches of these duties may result in disciplinary sanctions, irrespective of whether the arbitration agreement contains an express confidentiality obligation. Also, it is widely accepted that a duty of confidentiality may be implicitly inferred from the contractual mandate conferred upon arbitrators. However, this implied obligation does not automatically extend to the parties themselves, reinforcing the need for express contractual regulation.

Institutional arbitration rules often provide a more comprehensive framework. For example, the rules of the Milan Chamber of Arbitration impose confidentiality obligations on the parties, arbitrators, experts and the arbitral institution itself, subject to limited exceptions (e.g. enforcement proceedings, legal obligations or consent of the parties).

12.1 Requirements as to content and form

Under Article 823 of the CCP, an award must meet the following requirements:

• to be rendered in written form;
• to indicate the names of the arbitrators and the parties;
• to specify the seat of the arbitration;
• to refer to the arbitration agreement;
• to summarise the claims and relief sought by the parties;
• to contain a reasoning, at least in a concise manner; and
• to include the operative (dispositive) part of the decision.

The award must be signed by the arbitrators.

Signature by a majority of the tribunal is sufficient, provided that the award expressly states that all arbitrators participated in the deliberations and explains the absence of the remaining signature, in accordance with Article 823(2) of the CCP.

12.2 Time limit

If the parties have not agreed on a specific deadline, the award must be issued within 240 days from the date on which the last arbitrator accepts the appointment. This deadline may be extended:

• by agreement of the parties;
• by order of the competent court; or
• automatically, upon the occurrence of certain procedural events expressly listed in Article 820(4) of the CCP (such as challenges to arbitrators or requests for interim measures).

12.3 Remedies

Following the 2022 reform, arbitral tribunals seated in Italy may grant the same forms of relief available to state courts, unless otherwise restricted by law.

13.1 Interpretation and correction of awards

Either party may request the arbitral tribunal to correct clerical mistakes, calculation errors or material omissions. The correction request must be submitted within one year from the notification of the award. If the award has already been filed for its recognition and enforcement, or for being set aside, the correction must be requested to the competent Court of Appeal.

13.2 Challenge of an award

Arbitral awards rendered in Italy may be challenged exclusively by way of annulment proceedings.
Pursuant to Articles 828 and 829 of the CCP, jurisdiction lies with the Court of Appeal of the seat of the arbitration. The right to seek annulment cannot be waived in advance by the parties. Awards are not subject to review on the merits, unless the parties have expressly agreed to allow challenges for errors of law, or the law expressly provides otherwise (e.g. in certain corporate or labour disputes).

Article 829(1) of the CCP lists the procedural grounds on which an award may be set aside, including:

• invalidity of the arbitration agreement;
• defects in the appointment of arbitrators;
• lack of capacity of the arbitrators;
• decisions on a matter not contemplated by, or exceeding the scope of the arbitration agreement or, while falling within the scope of the arbitration agreement, was not the subject matter of a claim filed by the parties;
• failure to comply with mandatory formal requirements;
• violation of the time limit for rendering the award;
• breach of agreed procedural rules set by the parties;
• conflict with a prior judgment or award having res judicata effect;
• violation of due process and the adversarial principle;
• failure to decide on the merits when required;
• contradictions in the dispositive part of the award; and
• omission to rule on claims or objections duly submitted in conformity with the arbitration agreement.

In addition, awards may be annulled if they are contrary to Italian public policy.

Annulment proceedings are subject to strict deadlines:

• 90 days from the service of the award; or
• six months from the date of the last arbitrator’s signature, if the award has not been served.

13.3 Recognition and enforcement proceedings

An arbitral award rendered in an Italy-seated arbitration acquires effects equivalent to a court judgment from the date of its last signature. To enforce the award, the prevailing party must apply for an exequatur before the court at the seat of the arbitration. The court’s review at this stage is limited to verifying the formal regularity of the award and does not extend to its substantive correctness. Once exequatur is granted, enforcement is carried out under ordinary rules applicable to court judgments and it is therefore subject to the 10-year “ordinary” limitation period under Article 2946 of the CC.

13.4 Cost of enforcement

The costs associated with enforcement proceedings very much depends on the activity required. To start enforcement proceedings, state duties are relatively modest, as they currently consist of a fixed court tax of EUR 98 and a stamp duty of EUR 27.

In addition, enforceable awards are subject to registration tax, generally at a rate of 1% or 3% of the amount due under the award, depending on the nature of the relief granted.

13.5 Enforcement of orders of emergency arbitrators

Following the 2022 reform, arbitral tribunals seated in Italy may grant interim measures where empowered to do so. While Italian law does not expressly regulate the enforcement of foreign emergency arbitrator orders, it is widely expected that such orders may be recognised and enforced in Italy, provided that they are compatible with Article 818 of the CCP (as amended) and the fundamental principles of Italian public policy.

It is worth noting that CAM Rules expressly provides for the possibility to appoint an urgency arbitrator, before the constitution of the arbitral tribunal.

14.1 Process for enforcing New York Convention awards

Italy ratified the New York Convention in 1968, with no reservations. As a result, the Convention applies without reciprocity or other limitations. The enforcement procedure is governed by Articles 839 and 840 of the CCP, read in conjunction with Articles III–V of the New York Convention, and unfolds in two phases, as follows.

Ex parte phase

The party seeking recognition and enforcement of a foreign award in Italy must file an application before the Court of Appeal having territorial jurisdiction, typically determined by the domicile or registered office of the award debtor. If the debtor does not reside in Italy, the Court of Appeal of Rome shall be competent. At this stage, the court verifies:

• the formal regularity of the award; and
• the absence of manifest grounds for refusal under Article V(2) of the Convention (which may be examined ex officio).

If the review is positive, the President of the Court of Appeal issues a decree granting enforceability of the arbitral award.

Opposition phase (if initiated)

The opposing party may challenge the decree before the same Court of Appeal, sitting as a panel.

In this phase, the court assesses whether any of the refusal grounds under Article V(1) or V(2) of the Convention are established.

This bifurcated structure ensures efficiency while preserving the debtor’s right to be heard.

14.2 Grounds for resisting enforcement of New York Convention awards

The grounds for refusal of recognition or enforcement in Italy mirror those listed under Article V of the New York Convention. Italian courts interpret these grounds restrictively, in line with the Convention’s objective of facilitating the circulation of arbitral awards.

14.3 Enforcing non-Convention awards

Foreign arbitral awards that do not fall within the scope of the New York Convention are enforceable in Italy under Articles 839 and 840 of the CCP alone, which anyway mirror the grounds for resisting enforcement set under the Convention.

15.1 Applicable to counsel

Counsels appearing in arbitrations seated in Italy must comply with the ethical and conduct obligations set out in the Italian Bar Association’s Code of Conduct, including duties of loyalty, confidentiality, honesty, independence, and avoidance of conflicts of interest.

15.2 Applicable to arbitrators

Italian lawyers serving as arbitrators remain subject to the Italian Bar Association’s Code of Conduct (Article 61), which allows disciplinary sanctions where conduct in arbitral proceedings compromises independence, impartiality, or professional dignity. In Milan‑seated arbitrations, the CAM Ethical Code for Arbitrators also applies, requiring strict impartiality, independence, transparency, and diligence.

16.1 Applicable regulatory requirements

Italy has no statutory provisions specifically regulating third‑party funding in litigation and in arbitration, both on the claimant side and on the resistant side.

In a recent judgment, Italian Supreme Court confirmed the validity of third-party funding arrangements, despite the absence of specific provisions on the matter, specifying that litigation financing must not be considered banking activity subject to the Consolidated Banking Law (Testo Unico Bancario), which requires — among others — registration in an appropriate register of the Bank of Italy.

Article 43 of the CAM Arbitration Rules (2023) requires any party receiving third-party funding to disclose the existence of the funding and the identity of the funder. This disclosure must be repeated along the proceedings, until its conclusion, where supervening facts so require or when the arbitral tribunal or the Secretariat of CAM deem it necessary.

16.2 Overview of the third-party funding market

Third-party funding is growing significantly, especially in connection with major international arbitration cases, especially in energy, construction and investment disputes.

In a recent report (March 2025), the European Commission has highlighted the importance of such an instrument, simultaneously affirming that a European regulation or directive is necessary to ensure transparency and avoid conflicts of interest, since in most states there is no specific legislation on the matter.

Italy is not known for a particular type of arbitration. However, arbitration is growing significantly and new types of “special arbitrations” have been introduced in several sectors, including insurance, sport, finance and corporate disputes. For instance, the Insurance Arbitrator (Arbitro Assicurativo) is active starting from 15 January 2026: it offers a fast, low‑cost, online ADR path for insurance disputes (document‑based decisions within defined timelines), complementing court litigation and standard arbitration while easing courts workloads.

17.1 Types of specialist arbitration

See above.

17.2 Key legal principles

See above.

17.3 Types of claim and defences typically brought in that area

See above.

17.4 Issues and strategic considerations to take note of

None.

Arbitration is growing significantly in Italy, and the recent legislative updates further improved Italian arbitration law (see in particular arbitrators’ power to grant interim measures, among other improvements). Arbitral institutions, and in particular CAM, are setting specific streamlined procedures (e.g. a simplified and streamlined arbitration) and task forces to provide industry-focused services (e.g. in the life science and construction space). These developments are strengthening Italy’s reputation as a reliable arbitration seat.

Is there a word missing here? 'has'?

Is there a word missing here? 'or'?