A major company, represented by Prof. Antonio Briguglio and Alessandra Siracusano, obtained a significant victory before the Italian Supreme Court in proceedings concerning third-party attachment (pignoramento presso terzi).
Judgment No. 8478/2026 of 4 April 2026, issued by the Third Civil Division of the Italian Supreme Court, represents an important success for the attaching creditor and establishes significant principles of law concerning the management and effectiveness of third-party attachment proceedings.
The Supreme Court dismissed in full the appeal brought by the third-party debtor, thereby confirming the correctness of the position taken by the enforcing creditor, both from a procedural standpoint and with regard to the legal principles affirmed by the Court.
The dispute arose from the opposition filed by the third-party debtor (debitor debitoris) against the attachment order issued in the context of third-party enforcement proceedings. The third-party debtor argued that sums which had been included in its declaration as attachable assets could no longer be assigned, having subsequently been released, on the assumption that certain orders issued by the enforcement judge, at the request of the judgment debtor, had limited the scope of the attachment.
The Supreme Court rejected this argument and confirmed that the creditor had lawfully enforced its rights over the assigned sums, even though such amounts were no longer held by the third-party debtor.
The Court clarified a fundamental principle for the effectiveness of enforcement actions: the third-party debtor’s obligation to preserve the attached assets, pursuant to Articles 543 and 546 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, and to hold them for the benefit of the creditors, is mandatory and cannot be waived. The enforcement judge may not modify the scope of such custody obligation through atypical or extra ordinem measures, outside the specific remedies provided by law.
Based on the principle that the third-party debtor may not dispose of the attached sums “without a clear and unequivocal order of the Court” containing a specific directive to that effect, the Supreme Court rejected the defence based on good faith and payment to an apparent creditor pursuant to Article 1189 of the Italian Civil Code.
As a consequence, the Court declared unenforceable against the creditor the payments made by the third-party debtor to the judgment debtor in breach of the attachment order.