DLP Insights

Compromising relationships with customers justifies dismissal

01 Jun 2015

The Milan Court, Labour Section, with a ruling of 30 April 2015 made a decision in a proceeding started by a manager who challenged a dismissal for just cause following a disciplinary proceeding started by the employer (i.e. an asset management company) for having seriously compromised relationships with investors of the managed investment funds. Initially in his appeal, the manager had asked the judge to declare the dismissal null and void since it was served as a reprisal, to ascertain its injurious nature and sentence the employer to reinstating the manager, payment of his remuneration from the dismissal to reinstatement, as well as compensation for professional damages and non-pecuniary damages. Subordinately, the manager had asked for the employer to be sentenced to payment of the notice and supplementary compensation pursuant to the manager national labour contract applied to the employment. To support his allegations the manager also sustained that the dismissal was unlawful given connection of the disputed events with the prerogatives of the employer’s board of directors (in this case the position of CEO held by the same) and not those of manager. The Company sustained that the claims made against the manager were specific, timely and related to both the prerogatives of the CEO and manager. The Judge rejected the appeal holding that all of the charges against the manager were proven and the seriousness of such did not allow continuation of the employment. The Judge also made a decision regarding the manager’s allegations concerning the involvement of the employer’s Board of Directors’ prerogatives in the disputed facts and not those of the manager. On this point, the Judge sustained that, even if the facts used as a foundation for the various disputes could in part coincide (editor’s note with the office of CEO and position of manager), the same needed to be evaluated solely from an employment law standpoint and thus in relation to the possible injury to the relationship of mutual trust that the disputed conduct had caused.

Italian Court of Cassation: second dismissal lawful pending judgment on the first

30 Jan 2024

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 ....

Liability under Italian Legislative Decree no. 231/2001: obtaining minimal advantage does not exempt the employer

29 Dec 2023

With 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 ....

Dismissal to reduce costs: what does the employer need to prove?

29 Dec 2023

With 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 ....

Italian Court of Cassation: assessment of CCNL job descriptions essential for repêchage (obligation to relocate)

28 Nov 2023

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 ....