Categories: Insights, Case Law


31 Aug 2016

Court of Cassation: trial period and its validity

With sentence no. 16214 dated 3 August 2016, the Court of Cassation affirmed that a trial period must be accepted in writing by the employee. In this particular case, a female employee asked the Courts to quash the termination of her employment because the trial period specified in the employment contract had expired. The employer claimed that the employee, replying to an email from the company warning her of the need to extend the trial period, had offered to draft a letter herself to this effect, a letter she sent by email to the company unsigned. The letter was signed in two original copies by the legal representative of the company and handed over to her for her signature and her records. The trial period continued with a negative outcome for future employment, and the company notified the employee of the termination of employment, only to discover that she had not signed the extension letter. Confirming the previous rulings, the Court of Cassation pointed out that trial periods in writing pursuant to section 2096 of the Italian Civil Code are required «ad substantiam» and must be established from the outset of the working relationship without equivalents or modification. In the opinion of the Court, in this case, the written form was defective because the employee had restricted herself to drafting an extension letter, sending it to the company by email, without signing it. Furthermore, according to the Court, «the trial period is an incidental part of the contract, which does not exist and can have no effect if it is not expressly included by the parties in the individual contract». In other words, in the opinion of the Court, an agreement to extend the trial period, signed after the commencement of work and not part of the employment contract has no effect in relation to the duration of the trial period. Finally, the Court reaffirmed the principle according to which a trial period must be declared null and void where «employment duties are not specified, and hence conversion of the working relationship into definitive employment from the outset”. Because «dismissal due to failure to satisfy during the trial period, where no trial valid period has been specified, is unjustified due to lack of proper cause».

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 Sep 2026

Company files deleted from the PC: dismissal lawful even without proof of damage

The matter arises from the disciplinary dismissal of an employee performing general secretarial duties who, upon returning the company computer following a change in her duties, handed back…

1 Sep 2026

Overtime work: a summary schedule is not enough, employees must provide strict evidence of both the hours worked and the extent of the overtime performed

With order no. 20700 of 18 June 2026, the Italian Supreme Court once again addressed the issue of overtime work, reiterating that employees claiming overtime pay must strictly…

1 Sep 2026

Did you know that… an individual allowance that has remained unchanged for years may become non-absorbable?

In judgment no. 24475 of 5 August 2026, the Employment Section of the Italian Supreme Court confirmed that an individual allowance (i.e. “superminimo”), although normally subject to the…

3 Aug 2026

Pay Transparency: the first requests from employees are starting to arrive (Il Sole 24 Ore, 3 august 2026 – Vittorio De Luca)

Two months after the decree. Since Legislative Decree 96/2026 came into force on 7 June, according to a flash survey conducted by GIDP, 8% of HR directors have…

30 Jul 2026

Corporate controls and data protection: what balance?

A recent judgment of the Court of Pisa, No. 800 of 13 June 2026, addresses a topic of particular interest for companies: the delicate balance between the protection…

30 Jul 2026

Unfair dismissal and reinstatement: the employee must repay the payment in lieu of notice

With order no. 22187 of 28 June 2026, the Italian Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether payment in lieu of notice paid to an employee must be…