Categories: DLP Insights, Case Law
With ruling no. 25674 of 9 October 2014, filed on 4 December 2014, the Cassation Court once again intervened on the issue of control performed by employers using investigation agencies, confirming its legality when performed to protect company assets, as long as the investigation agency’s control is limited "to illegal acts performed by employees not solely linked to mere failure to fulfil an obligation".
In its very recent judgment no. 2274 of 23 January 2024, the Italian Court of Cassation ruled that it is lawful for an employer to give notice of a second dismissal pending a judgment concerning a previous dismissal based on different grounds. However, the second dismissal has no effect if the first dismissal is declared ....
Read moreWith judgment no. 39129 of 26 September 2023, the Italian Court of Cassation, Third Criminal Division addressed the issue of corporate administrative liability under Italian Legislative Decree no. 231/2001, stating that “corporate administrative liability is not excluded in the light of the minimal advantage or the insignificance of the interest pursued.” The facts of the ....
Read moreWith Order no. 31660 of 14 November 2023, the Italian Court of Cassation ruled that, when dismissal for justified objective reason (giustificato motivo oggettivo, ‘GMO’) is to reduce costs, the burden is on the employer to indicate the reasons why the particular worker has been chosen. The facts of the case The employee appealed the ....
Read more
By Order of 13 November 2023, no. 31561, the Italian Court of Cassation ruled that, to fully comply with the repêchage obligation (obligation to relocate), it is necessary to assess whether hires made following the termination for justified objective reasons are of the same level of classification as the dismissed employee. The facts of the ....
Read more