Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- |
| European flag | Official Journal  of the European Union | EN  C series |

---

|  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- |
|  | C/2025/2365 | 28.4.2025 |

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 10 February 2025 – M.M. Ristorazione Srl v Villa Ramazzini Srl

(Case C-132/25, M.M. Ristorazione)

(C/2025/2365)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant and appellant: M.M. Ristorazione Srl

Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: Villa Ramazzini Srl

Question referred

Must Article 9(5) of Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights [(1)](#ntr1-C_202502365EN.000101-E0001) be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law, namely Article 132(4) of Decreto legislativo del 10 febbraio 2005, n. 30 – Codice della proprietà industriale (Legislative Decree No 30 of 10 February 2005 – Italian Industrial Property Code), as amended, under which the requirement for the protective measure to cease to have effect in the event of failure to institute the substantive proceedings within a mandatory time limit, contained in Article 132(3) of the Italian Industrial Property Code, does not apply to interim measures issued pursuant to Article 700 of the codice di procedura civile (Italian Code of Civil Procedure) and to other protective measures capable of anticipating the effects of the judgment on the substance, even though, in such cases, either party may institute the substantive proceedings?

---

---

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2365/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

---

[Top](#document1)