Categories: Insights, Case Law


25 Oct 2016

Lawful dismissal only at the presence of violent intentional acts

The Court of Cassation, with judgement No. 20211 published on 7 October 2016, issued its ruling on the matter of dismissal for just cause notified to an employee for having participated in a “violent altercation with a colleague then followed by bodily harm”. In this case, the Court of Cassation confirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal of Milan, which deemed unlawful the dismissal and consequently ordered the reinstatement of the employee because the employer failed to prove that the fact that took place was attributed to the employee both in terms of materiality and intentionality of the conduct. In fact, according to the findings of the Court of Appeal, witnesses confirmed that a brawl between the two workers indeed took place, but they issued conflicting statements on how it happened, so conclusive proof on the dynamics of the events could not be obtained. The company criticized the judgement through an appeal arguing that the Court at the time of the counterclaim incorrectly assessed the proof acquired and, given the fact that it was ascertained in the deeds that the altercation indeed occurred, it was the employee’s responsibility to demonstrate the existence of discrimination and that his conduct was in response to an aggression suffered by the hands of another employee. The Court of Cassation, however, rejected the plaintiff’s argument. Indeed, in the opinion of the judges, in the matter of dismissal for just cause, it is the responsibility of the employer to prove the fact attributed to the employee, proving it both in material and intentional terms. The justificatory evidence linked to the employee is then the element that emerges only where previous demonstration of the fault associated to the employee occurred, fault whose proof could not be obtained in this case.

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…