Author: arblit

In the context of the event “Le novità della recente Riforma Cartabia. From disclosure duties to precautionary measures”, organised by the Swiss Chamber of Commerce in Italy in cooperation with Osborne Clarke, Prof. Massimo Benedettelli will speak at the panel “Appointment of arbitrators and new disclosure obligations; arbitration demand and traslatio iudicii; arbitration and precautionary measures; recognition of foreign awards and other novelties of the reform”.

For further information and registration:

In the context of the Hamburg International Arbitration Days, professor Massimo Benedettelli will speak at the conference organized by the Bucerius Law School on Arbitration with State-Parties, Salient Issues presenting a paper on Merit Issues: Understanding the Interplay Between Public International Law, Private International Law and “Transnational Law” (if any). Info and registration here:

As made public by Global Arbitration Review, our partner Prof. Massimo Benedettelli has given an expert opinion in proceedings pending in The Netherlands before the Hague Court of Appeal for the setting aside of an award rendered in an investor-state arbitration arising out of the Spain-Venezuela Bilateral Investment Treaty.

The opinion supports the right of the investor to challenge a decision whereby the arbitral tribunal declined jurisdiction, notwithstanding Dutch arbitration law seems prima facie to allow challenges only of awards whereby the tribunal’s jurisdiction is affirmed. It holds that such interpretation of Dutch law would trigger the breach by The Netherlands of its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, being at odds with the fundamental right to access-to-justice protected by Article 6(1), giving rise to an unequal treatment of the claimant and the respondent in violation of Article 14, and being prejudicial to the equal protection of the laws commanded by Article 1 of  Protocol 12 to the Convention, particularly in light of the fact that international arbitral tribunals are the juge naturel for investment claims and that domestic courts are in most cases not available to grant the relief sought by the investor.

To read the article published by Global Arbitration Review:

Massimo Benedettelli contributed to the drafting of the first commentary on the arbitration principles contained in the delegation law no. 206 of 21 November 2021, art. 1, paragraph 15, analyzing (and, where necessary, criticizing) letter d) of the same paragraph dealing with the need to “foresee, in the case of a decision to be given in accordance with the law, the power of the parties to indicate and choose the applicable law“.

The work, coordinated by Antonio Briguglio and written in collaboration with other renowned authors, will be published in the next issue of the Rivista dell’Arbitrato and is available in preview at the following link: /

In the context of the 6th ICC European Conference on International Arbitration held in Paris, on March 28, 2022, our partner Massimo Benedettelli – in his capacity of Member of the ICC International Court of Arbitration – chaired a session titled “Are you making the most of your dispute resolution clause? Are you making the most of everything ICC DRS’ offering?”.

The panel, composed of Bernard Hanotiau, Marion Smith QC, Flávio Spaccaquerche Barbosa and Elina Zlatanska, discussed the evolution of dispute resolution clauses over the past 10 years with an eye to ICC DR’s tools, and focused in particular on samples of “bad” clauses, on the inclusion of ADR in arbitration agreements, on the failure to comply with multi-tier dispute resolution clauses, and on accelerated procedures.

ArbLit, with a team composed by partners Marco Torsello and Massimo Benedettelli, senior associate Federica Serrantoni and associate Gregorio Baldoli, has drafted the Italian chapter of The Legal 500: Litigation Country Comparative Guide, the go-to publication for comparative and cross-border litigation. Thanks to its “Q&A” format and hands-on approach, ArbLit’s guide is meant to assist foreign parties, attorneys and in-house counsel with navigating the waters of litigation in Italy and avoiding certain recurring pitfalls.

On 1 July 2021, ARBLIT’s partner Massimo Benedettelli has been reappointed by the ICC World Council to serve as the Italian member of the International Court of Arbitration of the ICC for the term 2021-2024.


In a press release of 5 July 2021, Massimo stated: “I am honored for the decision taken by the ICC World Council, which decided to renew my term in the ICC Court for another three years by appointing me as a member for Italy, to be now joined by my friend Ferdinando Emanuele who enters the Court as an alternate member. Italy boasts a community of arbitrators, lawyers, and international arbitration law experts of quality and tradition, and an excellent arbitration law, as I hope to have demonstrated in my recent treaty International Arbitration in Italy. This appointment also follows that of Luca Radicati di Brozolo a few years ago as Vice-President of the London Court of International Arbitration and confirms the international recognition of ARBLIT, the only Italian boutique focused on arbitration and cross-border litigation”.

ArbLit, with the Litigation team led by Marco Torsello, obtained an important decision from the Court of Appeal of Milan (presided by H.J. Dr. Carla Romana Raineri), which reversed the decision of the court of first instance, and affirmed the jurisdiction of Italian courts in a multi-million claim brought by Italian investors against the Irish branch of a major U.S. bank. The bank had acted as Administrator of a foreign investment fund; the claimants argued that the bank’s misleading certification of the fund’s Net Asset Value induced them to invest approximately € 25 million, which were then entirely lost. The Court of Appeal of Milan affirmed the jurisdiction of Italian courts under Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012, as recently interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Löber case. In particular, the Court upheld the position of the investors, represented by ArbLit, who had stressed the fact that the “information flow” produced by the bank was knowingly addressed towards Italy, to the effect that the harmful event (consisting of the relevant financial investment, which was subsequently lost in full) could be located in Italy.