Background

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that national laws must not allow preliminary injunctions to remain effective indefinitely where the applicant has failed to initiate proceedings on the merits and the defendant applies for their revocation.

Subsequent Outcome

In response, Italy enacted Law Decree No. 100/2026 (effective June 12, 2026; the “Decree”), introducing a transitional regime for preliminary injunctions issued under the previous framework.

Outlook

This opens a limited window for defendants to challenge existing injunctions that were never followed by proceedings on the merits. Right holders must urgently review their preliminary injunction portfolios and assess whether action is required to maintain the validity of these measures.

CJEU Judgment and Italy’s Response

On April 23, 2026, the CJEU ruled in Case C-132/25 (M.M. Ristorazione v. Villa Ramazzini) that the Enforcement Directive precludes national rules allowing preliminary injunctions to remain effective indefinitely where the applicant has never initiated proceedings on the merits and the defendant seeks revocation. This ruling directly targeted the previous regime under Article 132(4) of the Italian Industrial Property Code (IPC), which allowed preliminary injunctions to remain effective indefinitely without imposing an obligation on the right holder to initiate proceedings on the merits.

The Italian government acted swiftly to implement the ruling by enacting the Decree: besides amending Article 132(4) IPC and extending identical rules to the copyright sector, this legislative reform established specific transitional arrangements for preliminary injunctions granted under the old regime.

Transitional Regime

The most immediate practical impact of the Decree lies in its transitional provisions (Article 2(3)), applicable to preliminary injunctions issued prior to June 12, 2026.

Defendants may now apply under Article 669-novies of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure to revoke or declare ineffective preliminary injunctions that were not followed by proceedings on the merits. Such applications must be submitted within 60 days starting June 12, 2026, subject to the rules on the suspension of procedural time limits. If such an application is filed, the court may, upon the right holder’s request, restore the time limit to initiate proceedings on the merits while maintaining the validity of the measure. For both defendants and right holders, this reform defines a time-limited yet critical litigation window that will determine whether long-standing injunctions are maintained or revoked.

Impact on Defendants

For defendants subject to preliminary injunctions issued under the old rules without subsequent proceedings on the merits, the transitional regime provides a retroactive revocation mechanism. Defendants must apply for the revocation and declaration of ineffectiveness of the injunction pursuant to Article 669-novies of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure within the strict 60-day statutory time limit. This remedy generally has retroactive effect ex tunc, meaning the preliminary injunction in question loses its legal validity from the time it was initially granted. This opportunity is subject to a strict time limit: if no application is filed before the deadline expires, the defendant forfeits the right, and the preliminary injunction remains effective.

Impact on Right Holders

The transitional regime presents corresponding risks for right holders who obtained preliminary injunctions under the old regime without initiating proceedings on the merits: such injunctions are now vulnerable to revocation.

Right holders should therefore prepare for potential revocation applications filed by defendants during the transitional period. If such a scenario arises, the right holder must act swiftly to request a restoration of the time limit for initiating proceedings on the merits and commence the action on the merits, thereby mitigating the risk of the interim measure being deemed void ex tunc.

However, right holders may also consider proactively initiating proceedings on the merits before any revocation application is filed, particularly where they have a specific interest in maintaining the injunction's force or in controlling the procedural narrative. By doing so, right holders can reduce procedural uncertainty and secure a stronger position should a revocation proceeding subsequently be brought.

Unresolved Legal Question: Pending Proceedings on the Merits

The transitional mechanism applies exclusively to cases where proceedings on the merits have not yet been initiated; it does not address situations where the right holder voluntarily commenced proceedings on the merits that remain pending.

In such cases, the reform’s goal of ensuring that interim measures are followed by a decision on the merits has in fact been fulfilled. Nevertheless, because the Decree contains no explicit provision for this situation, right holders should audit their pending cases to ensure procedural progress adequately safeguards the continued effectiveness of the measures.

European Perspective

The CJEU ruling applies across the entire European Union. Major jurisdictions such as France, Germany, Belgium, Spain, and the Netherlands appear compliant, as their current rules already require preliminary measures to be followed by proceedings on the merits. However, if any Member State's domestic law allows IP injunctions to remain effective without satisfying this requirement, it may face issues of legal compatibility. Italy is currently the primary focus, where existing injunctions must be reviewed before the end of the transitional period.

Three Key Takeaway

1. Across all EU jurisdictions: National laws allowing IP injunctions to remain effective without initiating proceedings on the merits or providing a revocation mechanism risk conflicting with Article 9(5) of the IP Enforcement Directive. Right holders should review all injunctions held across various jurisdictions.

   
   

2. Defendants in Italy subject to prior preliminary injunctions that were never accompanied by proceedings on the merits have a 60-day period starting June 12, 2026 (taking into account any applicable suspension of procedural time limits) to apply for revocation; this is a strict forfeiture period, and failure to act results in loss of the right.

   
   

3. Right holders in Italy should urgently audit existing preliminary injunctions. All injunctions granted without subsequent proceedings on the merits are currently vulnerable to challenge, and right holders should re-evaluate such measures from both procedural and strategic litigation perspectives.