2024-12-23 - CD Milan - Insulet v. EOFLOW - UPC_CFI_380/2024

1) The intervener must proof an interest justifying the support to the reasons of one of the parties and, specifically, not a mere factual interest, but a legally qualified interest, determined by the need to prevent the repercussion, in its own legal sphere, of any harmful consequences deriving from the judgement. 2) Intervention pursuant to Rule313 RoP is a sub-proceeding governed by rule of law in accordance with the adversarial principle. Applicant and respondent in the intervention proceedings must be considered as parties for the purpose of Rule150 RoP. 3) “Successful party” pursuant to Rule 151 is to be considered the winning party at the outcome of said sub-proceedings. The party gaining access to the proceedings or successfully preventing the access of a third party into the proceedings are entitled to ask for legal cost compensation pursuant to Art. 69 UPCA. 4) The assessment of proportionality and reasonableness of representation cost incurred by the winning party may be based on the fair assessment of the Court and does not require the issue of an invoice.

With this order, the Milan Central Division allowed an application for reimbursement of costs in intervention proceedings. The Court stated that intervention proceedings allowed for individual cost proceedings and the successful party was entitled to compensation of legal costs, just like in other types of proceedings.