Categories: Insights, Case Law


1 Jan 2017

A manager must agree and confirm its leave with the employer

With its judgement no. 26464 dated 21 December 2016, the Court of Cassation confirmed that a manager must agree and confirm its leave with the employer, if this is set forth by a collective or personal contract. In the case in question a manager was dismissed for cause because he had gone on leave arbitrarily despite the fact he knew that he had to make important payments on behalf of the company for which he worked. The Court, to whom the manager had applied, considered such dismissal to be unjustified, and ordered the company to pay a supplementary indemnity to the latter, in addition to an indemnity in lieu of notice. The Court of Appeal overturned the decision of the Court only in the part relevant to the supplementary indemnity, which was rejected, but considered the dismissal to be justified even if not for cause. In rejecting the appeal of the manager, the Court of Cassation stated that the discretion of the manager to decide the period in which to go on leave is subject to the limit of a contrary provision of the collective bargaining agreement (or, as the case may be, of the personal contract) that may set forth that the employee must agree and confirm its leave with the employer. Without prejudice to the fundamental right to enjoy leave, these must be agreed, if this is expressly set forth by contract, by the parties in accordance with company requirements.

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

1 Oct 2026

Corporate e-mail and defensive monitoring: when the GDPR and employment law lead to different outcomes 

The Piaggio case clearly illustrates how the same set of facts can give rise to profoundly different assessments depending on the perspective adopted. In its decision of 13…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI and Reinstatement: the Employee’s Election Causes Loss of the Benefit 

Headnote   In its recent judgment No. 24981 of 3 September 2026, the Italian Supreme Court held that, where a dismissal is set aside with an order of reinstatement…

1 Oct 2026

Did you know that… testimony given in court may have disciplinary relevance and, in the most serious cases, justify dismissal? 

The Italian Supreme Court, Labour Section, by order no. 25687 of 22 September 2026, addressed the issue of the disciplinary relevance of statements made by an employee in…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI in the workplace: how to govern risks, data, and security (Agenda digitale, 29 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Martina De Angeli)

The spread of artificial intelligence tools used without corporate authorization exposes businesses to risks involving personal data, confidential information, know-how, and cybersecurity. To govern Shadow AI, organizations need…

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…