Italy

Delfino e Associati Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP successfully assisted Polymarket.com in the administrative appeal before the Regional Administrative Court (TAR) against the order requiring the site to be blocked. On 15 December 2025, the Italian Agency for Customs and Monopolies ordered the immediate restoration of access to polymarket.com, which had originally been blocked by the same Agency pursuant to its powers to remove services and products deemed non-compliant with the regulations governing gaming and betting. Polymarket.com is a platform hosting so-called prediction markets on real-world events, ranging from politics and current affairs to economics and sports, with the stated aim of aggregating the forecasts of the “wisdom of crowds” in order to generate real-time statistics and polling data. In addition to predictive surveys, the platform also includes a feature that allows users to place bets—using cryptocurrencies, in particular the USDC stablecoin—on the outcomes of the reported events. Delfino e Associati Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP secured the revocation of the Agency’s blocking order with respect to all website functionalities unrelated to so-called prediction markets, thereby allowing users connecting from Italy to access all news, surveys, and information available on the site. This significant result was achieved by the team at Delfino e Associati Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, led by Attorney Roberto Cursano (pictured). Alongside Attorney Cursano, Attorneys Francesca Romana Baratta and Riccardo Ovidi assisted the client throughout all stages of the administrative proceedings. “The revocation of the original blocking order against polymarket.com, obtained following the filing of the appeal before the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio,” notes Roberto Cursano, partner at Delfino e Associati Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, “represents a particularly important precedent in the context of the regulation of digital services and innovative platforms. It confirms the need for a rigorous, proportionate, and case-by-case application of restrictive measures adopted by administrative authorities, especially when such measures affect access to online services and the freedom of information and economic initiative.”

Milan, December 22, 2025 – LawaL Legal & Tax Advisory expands its structure and strengthens its consulting services with the arrival of Pierpaolo Maio, as Partner, and the establishment of the new Data Governance & Strategy department. With a solid background in Digital Compliance, Life Sciences Law, and Data Protection, Mr. Maio brings to LawaL experience gained on complex projects with a high regulatory content, with a specific focus on Italian and European legislation. His professional activity covers strategic areas such as GDPR compliance, AI Act, Data Act, NIS2, and Legislative Decree 231/2001, integrating vertical skills in the definition of advanced data governance models, integrated compliance programs, document retention, and regulatory assistance in the healthcare and technology sectors. Particularly active on issues of artificial intelligence in healthcare, Mr. Maio assists leading life sciences and technology companies in managing compliance requirements relating to clinical trials, medical devices, and large-scale healthcare data processing. He regularly participates as a speaker at legal seminars in Italy and abroad and teaches in master's and postgraduate training programs. Alongside Pierpaolo Maio's arrival, Daniela Lucia Calabrese also joins the department as Senior Associate. A Digital Specialist and Cyber Legal, Policy & Compliance Officer, she has experience in digital compliance, cyber security, and digital preservation. She is an ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor and, as Preservation Manager, has expertise in ISO 16363 audits and the OAIS – ISO 14721 model. She assists public administrations and companies in defining compliance and audit strategies on NIS2, GDPR, AI Act, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, and NIST CSF, with a particular focus on digital preservation, document management, and infrastructure security. The new Data Governance department integrates synergistically with the firm's existing practices, further strengthening LawaL's ability to offer multidisciplinary advice on operations that require structured regulatory oversight in the areas of data protection, digital compliance, and responsible information systems management. With this addition, LawaL confirms its growth strategy and ongoing commitment to supporting clients in addressing the new challenges posed by regulatory and technological developments.

Angelo Zambelli – Founding Partner, Zambelli & Partners                                            28-11-2025 The employer must notify the revocation of the layoff within fifteen days of notification by the employee of the challenge of the dismissal. Once the deadline for revoking the dismissal has expired, for the purposes of reinstating the employment relationship, the general principles of the legal system re-expand and the revocation of the dismissal takes the form of a negotiation proposal subject to the employee’s acceptance. After clarifying, with judgment no. 16630 of 2024, that the fifteen-day period for revoking dismissal – starting from the notification to the employer of the relevant challenge of the layoff – is completed by simply sending the revocation to the employee, the Supreme Court has ruled again on the matter in rulings no. 26954 and 26957 both of 7 October 2025, regarding two cases of dismissal served on pregnant employees and subsequently revoked. In the first case, the Court of Appeal of Venice deemed the revocation of the dismissal, which took place more than fifteen days after the challenge of the termination, to be timely made, linking the starting date of the fifteen-day term to the date on which the employer had become aware of the employee’s pregnancy by way of a subsequent communication integrating the challenge itself and accompanied by a medical certificate attesting pregnancy. According to the Court of merits, if the invalidity of the dismissal is not known (nor knowable) to the employer and does not relate to the reasons grounding the dismissal, the deadline for exercising the right of revocation of the layoff does not start from the generic challenge against dismissal, but from the moment when the employee “by means of the challenge … discloses the reason for the invalidity [of the dismissal].” The Supreme Court, in its ruling no. 26954/2025, rejected this interpretation, referring first and foremost to the wording of Article 6 of Law no. 604/1966, which does not require any particular formality for the extrajudicial challenge of dismissal, as “any written document suitable for making known the employee’s intention to challenge the dismissal” is sufficient. That said, the Supreme Court clarified that the revocation of dismissal constitutes the exercise of an exceptional discretionary right that allows the employer to unilaterally affect the legal sphere of the employee, resulting in the automatic reinstatement of the employment relationship, provided that the act is adopted within the peremptory term of fifteen days from the challenge of dismissal. Once this deadline has passed, the general principles of the legal system “re-expand,” so that the revocation of the dismissal takes the form of a negotiation proposal, without immediate effect and subject to the employee’s acceptance pursuant to Article 1326 of the Italian Civil Code. The Supreme Court reached the same conclusions in judgment no. 26957/2025, which also concerned a case in which the revocation of the dismissal took place after the peremptory deadline of fifteen days from its challenge. On that case, the Court—reaffirming the principle of law that the fifteen-day period for revoking the dismissal commences from the date of the challenge against the dismissal, regardless of the reasons given by the employee for its invalidity—specified that, once that period has expired, a conclusive behaviour on the part of the employee is not sufficient for the purposes of reinstating the employment relationship, but an agreement is necessary, subject to the ordinary rules of contract formation and therefore based on the acceptance of the offer. Given that the interpretation of the law in the decisions appears to comply with the law, in the second case, a principle of stipulation of the agreement by conclusive facts could also be inferred. However, in the first degree, the Court of merits assessed that the employee had not accepted the company’s proposal. Key Action Points for Human Resources and In-House Counsel Practical Points The employer must notify the revocation of the layoff within fifteen days of notification by the employee of the challenge of the dismissal. Such fifteen-day deadline is not linked to the reason for which the dismissal was challenged and disclosed by the employee at a later stage; Once the deadline for revoking the dismissal has expired, for the purposes of reinstating the employment relationship, the general principles of the legal system re-expand and the revocation of the dismissal takes the form of a negotiation proposal subject to the employee’s acceptance.

CommerceClarity, a company engaged in the design and development of software that streamlines business processes in the e-commerce sector, announces the closing of a pre-seed investment round of approximately €2.7 million led by Italian Founders Fund and Entourage, with the participation, among others, of Euregio + Alpine Venture Capital and Vento Ventures. Italian Founders Fund and Entourage were advised by BonelliErede, with the venture capital team led by partner Giulia Bianchi Frangipane and composed of managing associate Enrico Goitre and associates Benedetta Duca and Francesca Gea Rusconi. CommerceClarity was assisted on legal matters by LawaL Legal & Tax Advisory with a team composed of partner Alessandro Funaro, senior associate Vittoria Laera and trainee Jacopo Sciarretta. The notarial aspects of the transaction were handled by notary Giovannella Condò and lawyer Giulia Tonini of Milano Notai.