The Supreme Court, with judgment n. 21297/2016, ruled that if  a writ of appeal is too long (but there are no regulations in force), it must be declared inadmissible for its conflict with art. 366 Code of Civil Procedure, n.3, which rules that there should be only a "brief statement of the facts of the case" and not a long repetition of documents (as happened in the present case, where the Court  had to analyze a 300 pages appeal) .

The Court declared that the former requirement stated by art. 366 Code of Civil Procedure n. 3 is actually observed when the parties write down a clear appeal, synthetic, summarizing the facts and the course of the procedure, so the judges can analyze it easily: on the contrary, an extremely stilted action is to be declared inadmissible because it infringes the rights of defense enshrined in  Constitution (art. 24 and art. 111) and  ECHR (art. 6).