Abati Legnami (Italy) v. Fritz Häupl
Italy Supreme Court
17 Y.B. Comm. Arb. 529 (1992)
- Written by Sara Adams, JD
Facts
Abati Legnami (defendant), which was an Italian company, and Fritz Häupl (plaintiff) were parties to an arbitration agreement. A contractual dispute arose between the parties. On August 11, 1991, Abati Legnami received instructions to appear for arbitration before the Vienna Commodity Exchange less than 30 days later. In Italy, the month of August was considered the annual summer holiday, and many businesses and offices were closed until September. Further, most judicial time limits and deadlines were suspended annually from August 1 to September 15, and therefore little legal business occurred in Italy during this period. The arbitration tribunal issued an award in favor of Häupl. Häupl filed an action to enforce the arbitration award in Italy before the Milan Court of Appeal, which granted enforcement. The court of appeal held that adequate notice was provided to Abati Legnami and that activities such as commercial arbitration should not be paused merely because in Italy, where Abati Legnami was located, a monthlong vacation was widely observed in August. Abati Legnami appealed to the Italy Supreme Court, arguing that the court of appeal ruled in error.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
