Categories: DLP Insights, Case Law
With its ruling no. 20068 of 7 October 2015, the Cassation Court confirmed that the dies a quo for the start of the 180 days for filing an appeal coincide with the date when a letter is sent by the employee challenging the employer’s dismissal and not the date the employer receives such letter. This interpretation which is unequivocal in case law, allows the worker to calculate with mathematical certainty the deadline for filing a lawsuit.
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