Italian Supreme Court: on the differences between recourse (regresso) and legal subrogation (surrogazione legale) in joint and several passive obligations

By judgment No. 16835/2026, published on 29 May 2026, the Supreme Court ruled on the differences between recourse (regresso) and legal subrogation (surrogazione legale) in the context of joint and several passive obligations, including with regard to the running of limitation periods.

The Supreme Court noted that the right of recourse, as an autonomous right arising from the payment of the entire debt, is subject to the ten-year limitation period running from the date of payment. By contrast, legal subrogation, which gives rise to a subjective modification on the active side of the obligatory relationship, is subject to the limitation period applicable to the original claim and may benefit from the interrupting acts carried out by the satisfied creditor.

The Court also specified that the right of recourse is accompanied by legal subrogation only in the case of so-called asymmetric joint and several passive obligations, i.e. those contracted exclusively in the interest of some of the co-debtors. This is because legal subrogation is characterised by the performance carried out by a person who is third to the original obligation and who nonetheless has a legally qualified interest in the performance, thereby justifying, in his favour, a phenomenon — substantially translative in nature — of succession to the claim. By contrast, in so-called parity, or common-interest, joint and several passive obligations, only the right of recourse arises, since in such cases the performance does not come from a party who is third to the original obligation.

To access the decision, click here.