Categories: Insights, Case Law


26 Feb 2018

Dismissal due to the use of a company car for private purpose is out of proportion

In Judgment no. 1377 lodged on 19 January 2018, the Court of Cassation has stated – in regard to an employment contract stipulated before the entry into force of Legislative Decree no. 23/2015 (so-called Jobs Act) – that a dismissal for just cause imposed on a worker who systematically used the company car, assigned to him only for reasons of his office, to travel from home to work and to go to lunch, is disproportionate. The Supreme Court relies on the assumption that in order to allow dismissal for just cause, a worker must have irremediably violated the fiduciary relationship that binds him to the employer, engaging in a conduct that is motivated by an abusive intent, in stark contrast to corporate rules. An essential element of this – according to the Court – is the proportionality of the behaviour at hand and the punishment imposed on the worker. Now, in the case at hand, in the court’s opinion, the conduct of the worker, even if unlawful, is certainly to be considered less serious, given that the use of a company car did not produce any negative consequences for the employer company, nor has it violated the company rules and the “values of the workers’ community”. In considering the dismissal out of proportion, the Court, therefore, concluded that the worker must be reinstated in his original job.

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…