In the underlying case, a German company had claimed damages for the delivery of defective meat by an Italian company. The Italian company had previously filed an application for an order for payment to enforce the payment claims arising from the delivered goods and the order for payment issued by the court was not contested.

At first instance, the Court of Reggio Emilia had ordered the Italian company to pay damages, a decision that was upheld by the Court of Appeal of Bologna, which did not consider that the res judicata effect of the uncontested payment order extended to the German company's claims for damages.

The Court of Cassation, to which the matter was referred, upheld the appeal on the grounds that the res judicata nature of the unopposed order for payment precluded further examination of the non-derivative but logically imputed issues. According to the Court of Cassation, the res judicata nature of the uncontested payment order ordering the German company to pay the price of the goods precludes a re-examination of all possible questions (including the defence of non-performance due to defects in the goods sold) which, although not raised, are essential and necessary logical preliminary questions of the decision that has become final. The uncontested payment order therefore implicitly established the seller's performance in conformity with the contract and the absence of defects in the goods.

This decision will come as a surprise to German lawyers, as substantive res judicata under the German Code of Civil Procedure covers the claim made, but not the underlying legal grounds and any preliminary issues (unless clarified by way of an interlocutory action for declaratory judgement).