Key principle
With order no. 27132 of October 9, 2025, the Italian Supreme Court – Labor Division – ruled that a company receiving a “single inspection and notification report” (i.e “verbale unico di accertamento e notificazione”) issued by the Italian Labor Inspectorate has a legitimate interest in bringing an action to annul it, even in the absence of subsequent measures by the Italian National Social Security Institute (i.e. “INPS”), whenever the report contains findings that may lead to social security contribution recoveries.
The facts and lower court decisions
A company challenged before the Court of first instance of Florence an inspection report issued following checks carried out at one of its construction sites, arguing that the report caused concrete prejudice, particularly concerning its contribution status with the INPS. The first instance Court dismissed the claim as inadmissible for lack of standing, holding that the report had no immediate adverse effects.
The company appealed, but the Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision. According to the appellate judges, the Labor Inspectorate’s report merely recorded the alleged violations and forwarded the file to the competent bodies, without creating any concrete contribution obligation: only a subsequent measure by the INPS could have generated an actual and concrete interest in judicial review.
The Supreme Court’s decision
The Supreme Court upheld the company’s appeal, quashed the appellate decision, and remanded the case to the Court of Florence for a new examination. According to the Court, the “single inspection and notification report” cannot be regarded as a neutral act or one without legal effects, as it establishes violations that may lead to contribution recoveries by social security bodies.
Consequently, the employer faces a concrete risk of losing contribution compliance status and, as a result, being unable to obtain the DURC (i.e. “Documento Unico di Regolarità Contributiva”, i.e. the certificate of social security compliance) or to participate in public tenders.
The Court clarified that this reasoning differs from that followed in administrative sanction matters, where the standing to act arises only upon the issuance of the injunction order. In the field of social security, however, Article 24, paragraph 3, of Legislative Decree no. 46/1999 expressly recognizes the admissibility of a negative declaratory action against a report containing a contribution claim.
Denying such standing would violate Article 100 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure and Article 24 of the Italian Constitution, as it would prevent judicial protection against an act capable of producing adverse legal consequences.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court held that whenever an inspection report contains findings capable of leading to contribution recoveries, the recipient has a legitimate interest in bringing a negative declaratory action to remove uncertainty regarding the existence and the actual nature of the employment relationship. Such interest is concrete because it serves to prevent the suspension of the right to obtain the DURC and, ultimately, to avoid the emergence of contribution obligations that the employer would subsequently be required to meet.
