Practical guide
How to draft an application for revocation with AI
4 min read · Updated June 2026 · Editorial oversight: Avv. Federico Papa
The application for revocation, governed by Art. 395 c.p.c., is an extraordinary remedy available against judgments issued on appeal or in a single instance. This legal tool aims to overturn a decision affected by specific and exhaustive grounds compromising substantive or procedural justice, such as party fraud or factual error. A distinction is made between ordinary revocation, for patent defects, and extraordinary revocation, for latent defects discovered subsequently, pursuant to Arts. 395 and 396 c.p.c. The application must be filed before the same court that rendered the challenged judgment, adhering to the prescribed form (writ of summons or petition, as applicable) under penalty of inadmissibility.
In brief
Revocation under Art. 395 c.p.c. is a remedy against appeal or single-instance judgments. It distinguishes between ordinary revocation for factual errors and extraordinary revocation for fraud or discovery of documents. Applications are filed before the same court via writ of summons or petition. Deadlines run 30 days from notification or discovery of latent defects. AI facilitates drafting the rescindant and rescissory phases. Filing does not automatically stay execution, though judges may grant stays for irreparable harm. The process requires identification of one of the six exhaustive statutory grounds.
The steps
- 1.
Identification of the grounds for revocation
The first fundamental step consists of identifying which of the six exhaustive grounds provided by Art. 395 c.p.c. affects the judgment. It is necessary to distinguish whether the defect is a factual error resulting from the record, justifying ordinary revocation, or whether it concerns fraud, false evidence, or the discovery of decisive documents, which pave the way for extraordinary revocation. The description of the ground must be analytical, highlighting the causal link between the defect and the content of the challenged decision.
- 2.
Verification of deadlines and procedural form
The challenge is filed by writ of summons (atto di citazione) before the same judge who pronounced the judgment, except in special proceedings or for the revocation of Supreme Court judgments, where a petition (ricorso) is used. For the latter, pursuant to Art. 391-bis c.p.c., the deadline is 60 days from notification or 6 months from the publication of the judgment. For ordinary revocation, the deadline is 30 days from notification; for extraordinary revocation, the 30 days run from the discovery of the fraud or decisive document pursuant to Arts. 325 and 326 c.p.c. It is essential to specify in the act, under penalty of inadmissibility, the exact day of discovery or recovery of the document.
- 3.
Drafting the statement of facts
The pleading must contain a clear and concise statement of the facts of the case and the course of the proceedings that led to the challenged judgment. It is necessary to specify the details of the judgment and the date it became final (passaggio in giudicato), if applicable. This section serves to contextualize the ground for revocation within the procedural history, demonstrating how the absence of the defect would have led to a different outcome.
- 4.
Formulation of conclusions (rescindant and rescissory phases)
The conclusions must be structured into two distinct but connected requests. First, one must request the revocation of the challenged judgment (rescindant phase), meaning its annulment due to the established defect. Second, it is necessary to formulate prayers for relief on the merits for the new judgment (rescissory phase), asking the court to rule again on the original claim taking into account the elimination of the defect.
- 5.
Service and filing of the pleading
The writ of summons must be served on the opposing parties and subsequently filed with the court registry within 20 days of service, pursuant to the rules of ordinary procedure referred to in Art. 398 c.p.c. In the case of a petition to the Supreme Court under Art. 391-bis c.p.c., service must precede filing with the registry of the Supreme Court. Failure to comply with filing deadlines or service procedures results in the inadmissibility or lack of prosecution of the appeal.
Legal basis: art. 395 c.p.c.art. 396 c.p.c.art. 398 c.p.c.
The template structure
The standard sections that make up the document. The full template can be opened and completed directly on edit.legal.
Competent Court
Indication of the judicial authority that issued the challenged judgment.
Parties
Identification details of the petitioner and respondent, including their legal counsel.
Challenged Judgment
Unique identification of the judgment via number, filing date, and issuing authority.
Ground for Revocation
Detailed statement of one of the grounds under Art. 395, numbers 1-6, c.p.c.
Conclusions
Request for annulment of the judgment and a new decision on the merits.
Place, Date, Signature, and Power of Attorney
Formal elements required for the validity of the pleading and procedural standing.
Mistakes to avoid
- Invoking revocation for defects that should have been raised through an appeal to the Supreme Court.
- Failing to specifically indicate the day of discovery of the decisive document in extraordinary revocation.
- Filing the act as a writ of summons for Supreme Court judgments instead of a petition under Art. 391-bis c.p.c.
- Failing to file the pleading with the court registry within 20 days of service.
Frequently asked questions
Does filing for revocation suspend the execution of the judgment?
No, revocation does not automatically stay execution of the judgment. However, upon a party's application, the competent court may order a stay if it considers the challenge not manifestly unfounded and execution could cause serious and irreparable harm.
What is the deadline for extraordinary revocation if the judgment was not served?
The 30-day deadline runs from the moment of discovery of the fraud, falsity, or decisive document, regardless of whether the judgment was served. The six-month long deadline under Art. 327 c.p.c. does not apply in this case.
Can a judgment already challenged before the Supreme Court be appealed for revocation?
Yes, the two remedies may coexist. If an application for revocation is filed while Supreme Court proceedings are pending, the latter may be stayed, upon a party's application, by the judge before whom the revocation is pending until communication of the judgment rendered on the revocation.
What edit.legal automates
- —Automated analysis of the challenged judgment to extract relevant details and key dates.
- —Verification of consistency between the grounds presented and the exhaustive list in Art. 395 c.p.c.
- —Automated calculation of forfeiture deadlines based on the date of discovery of the defect or service of the judgment.
Put edit.legal to the test on actual cases
Try edit.legal for free on an active case. No credit card required.
Try edit.legal for freeThis guide is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for your specific case.