The Supreme Court, with ordinance no. 24939\/2019, addressed the issue of the nature of the precautionary decision of suspension of a shareholders’ resolution on the exclusion of a shareholder from a limited partnership; and in particular, whether it has \u201canticipatory effects\u201d of the future decision \u2013 which has a \u201cconstitutive\u201d nature.
\nAccording to a first opinion, the suspension has an \u201canticipatory\u201d nature and therefore, pursuant to Article 669-octies of the Italian Civil Procedure Code, it does not lose effectiveness if the merit judgment extinguishes.
\nAccording to a different opinion, the suspension of the effects of a shareholders\u2019 resolution cannot be qualified as \u201canticipatory\u201d, because it is intended to prevent that its execution determines factual or legal modifications that cannot be eliminated. In other words, having regard to \u201cconstitutive\u201d decisions, the precautionary measure concerns the ruling consequential to such \u201cconstitutive\u201d judgment, that can only determine the constitution of a right.
\nIn light of the above, the Supreme Court observed that the purpose of the suspension of the exclusion resolution is to prevent the duration of the judgment from irreversibly affecting the position of the shareholder, should such status be then confirmed, allowing a \u201ctemporary\u201d restoration of the relationship between the latter and the company.
\nHaving regard to the case at hand, the Supreme Court ruled that the precautionary measure suspending the efficacy of a resolution that excludes a member of a limited partnership cannot have anticipatory content of the constitutive decision \u2013 which is the only decision that determines the conditions legitimizing the exclusion of a shareholder from the corporate structure \u2013 because it carries out an interim effectiveness corresponding with the content of the decision.
\nTherefore, the \u201cconstitutive\u201d nature of the decision prevents the anticipation of the effects to become definitive pursuant to Article 669-octies paragraphs 6 and 8 of the Italian Civil Procedure Code.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Supreme Court, with ordinance no. 24939\/2019, addressed the issue of the nature of the precautionary decision of suspension of a shareholders’ resolution on the exclusion of a shareholder from a limited partnership; and in particular, whether it has \u201canticipatory effects\u201d of the future decision \u2013 which has a \u201cconstitutive\u201d nature. According to a first […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":7978,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[50],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7300"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7300"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7300\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7978"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7300"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7300"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/it.andersen.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7300"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}