Categories: Insights, Case Law

Tag: Licenziamento per giustificato motivo oggettivo


28 Jan 2018

Indemnification only if the reason for dismissal is lacking

The Court of Cassation, with judgement No. 331 published on 10 January 2018, ruled once again on the penalties related to a dismissal for just cause deemed unlawful. In the specific case, an employee had been dismissed due to a change of corporate organisation triggered by a prefectural disqualification order due to alleged mafia infiltrations. Involved in the matter, the administrative court had then ruled unlawful the disqualification order, which led the employee to appeal the dismissal given that the reason leading to it was no longer valid. On the basis of this reasoning, the judge in charge ruled in favour of the employee and deemed application of the indemnification protection pursuant to paragraph 6 of article 18 of the Workers’ Charter in the case of dismissal “ruled void for violation of the reason requirement”,  with subsequent ruling against the employer and order to pay an indemnification ranging between 6 and 12 monthly pay based on the last total salary paid. The Court of Cassation, instead, was of a different opinion and ruled that the case in question did not fall under the case where specific proof of the non-existence of the fact on which the dismissal is based would apply (having verified that the disqualification order had been indeed issued); thus, deeming applicable the indemnification protection established by paragraph 5 of article 18, to be calculated as ranging between 12 and 24 monthly pay based on the last total salary paid.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Contact

Need information? Write to us and our team of experts will respond as soon as possible.

Fill in the form

More news and insights

24 Sep 2026

The concept of “territorial scope” in a non-compete agreement (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Alessandro Ferrari)

Interpretative issues in light of the most recent case law on the nullity of non-compete agreements due to the indeterminacy of territorial scope By an order issued on…

16 Sep 2026

Did you know that… repeated violations of company procedures may justify the dismissal of a store manager?

The Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section), in Order No. 25231 of 11 September 2026, upheld the lawfulness of the dismissal for just cause of a store manager who…

1 Sep 2026

Company files deleted from the PC: dismissal lawful even without proof of damage

The matter arises from the disciplinary dismissal of an employee performing general secretarial duties who, upon returning the company computer following a change in her duties, handed back…

1 Sep 2026

Overtime work: a summary schedule is not enough, employees must provide strict evidence of both the hours worked and the extent of the overtime performed

With order no. 20700 of 18 June 2026, the Italian Supreme Court once again addressed the issue of overtime work, reiterating that employees claiming overtime pay must strictly…

1 Sep 2026

Did you know that… an individual allowance that has remained unchanged for years may become non-absorbable?

In judgment no. 24475 of 5 August 2026, the Employment Section of the Italian Supreme Court confirmed that an individual allowance (i.e. “superminimo”), although normally subject to the…

3 Aug 2026

Pay Transparency: the first requests from employees are starting to arrive (Il Sole 24 Ore, 3 august 2026 – Vittorio De Luca)

Two months after the decree. Since Legislative Decree 96/2026 came into force on 7 June, according to a flash survey conducted by GIDP, 8% of HR directors have…