Checklist: Service of Process and Communications to Counsel under Arts. 85 and 170 c.p.c.

1. 1.

   Identifying the Recipient under Art. 170 c.p.c.

   Once a party has appeared in court (costituzione in giudizio), all service and communications must be directed to the attorney of record (procuratore costituito). This rule centralizes the information flow toward the legal expert, ensuring effective defense. Serving the party personally, except in specific cases provided by law, results in the service being null and void. It is essential to consult the electronic court file (fascicolo telematico) to accurately identify the counsel who filed the latest appearance or pleading, preventing addressing errors that could jeopardize procedural deadlines or cause unnecessary delays in the progression of the case.

2. 2.

   Handling Multiple Counsel

   If a party is represented by more than one lawyer, service to just one of them is fully valid and effective for the entire represented party. Case law, confirmed by the Italian Supreme Court in ruling no. 14593/2023, reiterates that there is no need to serve all co-counsel unless there is an explicit and specific instruction in the power of attorney (procura) requiring joint service. This rule simplifies the burden on the opposing party and speeds up the exchange of documents, placing the responsibility on the co-counsel to coordinate internally for the management of the case file and the timely notification of the represented client.

3. 3.

   Service Channel: PEC and Official Registers

   Electronic service must be performed exclusively to the certified email address (PEC) found in public registries such as INI-PEC or ReGIndE. There is no room for creative interpretations: using an address not listed in official registers makes the service null and void, even if the address actually belongs to the attorney. Only the appearance of the party or the lack of specific contestation regarding the achievement of the purpose (raggiungimento dello scopo) can remedy the defect. Practitioners must extract the address from the registers at the exact moment of service to ensure the certainty of the transmission channel and compliance with the technical specifications of the electronic civil trial.

4. Apply this research directly with edit.legal

   Legal research and drafting with citations checked against official databases. Try edit.legal for free, no credit card.

   Try edit.legal
   4.

   The Perpetuatio Principle under Art. 85 c.p.c.

   The relationship between client and lawyer may end through revocation (revoca) or resignation (rinuncia), but such a change cannot be asserted against the opposing party or the court until a substitution occurs. Pursuant to Art. 85 c.p.c., the resigning or revoked counsel retains full procedural powers and the obligation to receive service until the appointment of a new attorney is filed. This principle prevents a party from paralyzing the proceedings or creating documentary uncertainty simply by removing their counsel, thereby ensuring the continuity of the adversarial process and the stability of pending deadlines, regardless of the internal developments of the professional mandate relationship.

5. 5.

   Counsel's Obligations During the Interim Period

   During the timeframe between the lawyer's resignation and the appearance of the new legal counsel, the outgoing attorney is legally obliged to receive PEC service. It is their duty to inform the former client of any documents received that could involve forfeitures or require urgent action. The opposing party is not required to investigate the reasons for the resignation nor can they be burdened with searching for the party's new domicile. Service to the former counsel remains the only valid way to proceed regularly in the lawsuit, protecting third parties' reliance on the status resulting from the court records until the formal change of technical defense.

6. 6.

   Exceptions to Service on Counsel

   There are mandatory cases where service must once again be performed on the party personally. The primary example is Art. 292 c.p.c. regarding non-appearing parties (contumacia). Furthermore, if the attorney has died, been suspended, or been removed from the bar, Art. 301 c.p.c. applies, which may lead to the interruption of the proceedings. In these instances, unlike simple revocation or resignation, the counsel loses the capacity to receive acts effectively for the party. It is essential to distinguish between the voluntary termination of the relationship (Art. 85) and the objective impossibility of practicing the profession (Art. 301) to correctly choose the service strategy.

References: Art. 85 c.p.c.Art. 170 c.p.c.Art. 292 c.p.c.Art. 301 c.p.c.Cass. Civ. n. 14593/2023D.L. 179/2012

Editorial oversight: Avv. Federico Papa·ICAMUpdated 22 September 2026Content drafted with AI support and subject to editorial source checks. Despite these controls, inaccuracies may remain: reports and rectification requests are welcome. Report a correction