Answer ... The recognition and enforcement of EU judgments (issued in civil and commercial matters) in Italy may be challenged on the grounds set out in Article 45 of the Brussels I Recast Regulation.

The recognition and enforcement of non-EU judgments in Italy may be challenged if any of the following requirements set out under Article 64 of Law 218/1995 is not met:

• The jurisdiction of the foreign court over the dispute was compliant with the jurisdiction rules of Italian law;
• Service of the proceedings adhered to the laws of the state of origin and there was no infringement of the defendant’s right to a defence;
• The parties appeared in court or default has been declared in accordance with the laws of the state of origin;
• The judgment is final and binding in accordance with the laws of the state of origin;
• The judgment is not contrary to a final and binding judgment issued by an Italian court;
• No parallel proceedings were commenced before an Italian court with the same merits and between the same parties prior to the proceedings commenced in the state of origin; and
• The effects of the judgment are not contrary to public policy.

Moreover, special provisions govern the recognition of:

• non-EU judgments in matters concerning the capacity of persons, family relationships and personality rights (Article 65 of Law 218/1995); and
• non-EU judgments issued in non-contentious jurisdiction proceedings (Article 66 of Law 218/1995).

Normally, the party seeking enforcement of the non-EU judgment will commence proceedings to seek a declaration that the above requirements are met. However, the other party may also commence proceedings to have recognition or enforcement refused on the basis that any of the above requirements is not satisfied.

Answer ... No limitation period is specified in either the Brussels I Recast Regulation for EU judgments or Law 218/1995 for non-EU judgments.

Answer ... In principle, it is possible to seek injunctive relief (Article 700 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure) while the process is ongoing only if the applicant proves that:

• it has a prima facie case; and
• there is a risk that its rights may be compromised while the proceedings are pending.