Categories: Insights, Case Law


27 May 2018

Lawful dismissal for justified objective reasons not based on an economic crisis

The Court of Cassation, with judgement No. 9127 dated 12 April 2018 reviewed the case of dismissal for justified objective reasons not supported by a negative economic trend. In this case, the judges reviewing the case had deemed the employer’s dismissal unlawful because “the unfavourable situations were not such as to have a decisive influence on the normal productive activity of the sector“. The judges, on the other hand, pointed out that – although it was not possible to acknowledge the presence of a negative economic trend within the company and sector of the employer – it was unquestionable that the latter had indeed led to a corporate reorganisation, aimed at improving production efficiency and organisation, and therefore the suppression of the position of the dismissed employee. In light of this fact, the Supreme Court decided to transfer the case for judgement to the Court of Appeals having jurisdiction. Basically, in a dismissal for justified objective reasons a negative economic trend of the company does not represent a factual condition that the employer must prove, being sufficient the existence of reasons tied to productivity and business organisation such as to determine the effective removal of a specific job position. Moreover, from the reasoning of the Court it emerges that these reasons may include reasons aimed at a better managerial or productive efficiency or an increase in the profitability of the company. This is because, pursuant to art. 41 of the Constitution, the choice of the employer cannot be judged in terms of adequacy and appropriateness.

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…