Categories: Insights, Case Law

Tag: Datore di lavoro


25 Aug 2020

Court of Justice of the European Union – 16 July 2020 Ruling – Case C-658/18

The Court of Justice of the European Union, with its judgement of 16 July 2020 ruled on case C-610/18, and established that the actual “employer” should be considered the company that exercises authority over an employee, bears the corresponding wage cost and possesses the actual power to dismiss the employee, and not the company that only signs the employment contract, with the consequence that the employment is subject to the rules of the country where the real employer is established.

The case in question originates from a dispute started in the Netherlands by a company established in Cyprus that had signed employment contracts with international lorry divers resident in the Netherlands; based on these contracts the Cypriot company was designated as employer and stated that its legislation was applicable to the employment relationship. However, the employees had never lived or worked in Cyprus before these contracts and during their effectiveness they continued to live in the Netherlands.

The Dutch national court, taking into account these circumstances, declared the legislation of the Netherlands applicable to the lorry drivers’ employment in terms of social security and invested the Court of Justice of the European Union with the task of explaining if such employees should be considered as “part of the personnel” of the company with the formal position of employer or if, instead, they should be considered employees of the company at whose disposal they were at for at unlimited period of time.

The EU court hearing the case explained that signing of a job contract can be an indication of the existence of an employment relationship between the employee and company, but that alone may not be enough; it is also necessary to take into account the way in which the contract obligations are actually performed.

Therefore, regardless of the literal contents of the contract, the real employer is the entity whose authority is applicable to the worker, and who must bear the corresponding wages cost and who possesses the actual power for dismissal. The Court also stated that the objective of regulation 1408/71 is to ensure the free circulation of employees and self-employed workers within the European Union, but to comply with the particularities of national legislation concerning social security as well.

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

12 Oct 2026

“AI tools, remote work and confidential data: employer liability in a borderless environment” – IBA Conference 2026

At the IBA Annual Conference 2026 in Copenhagen, our Managing Partner Vittorio De Luca moderated a panel on one of the most pressing challenges facing employers today: the…

1 Oct 2026

Corporate e-mail and defensive monitoring: when the GDPR and employment law lead to different outcomes 

The Piaggio case clearly illustrates how the same set of facts can give rise to profoundly different assessments depending on the perspective adopted. In its decision of 13…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI and Reinstatement: the Employee’s Election Causes Loss of the Benefit 

Headnote   In its recent judgment No. 24981 of 3 September 2026, the Italian Supreme Court held that, where a dismissal is set aside with an order of reinstatement…

1 Oct 2026

Did you know that… testimony given in court may have disciplinary relevance and, in the most serious cases, justify dismissal? 

The Italian Supreme Court, Labour Section, by order no. 25687 of 22 September 2026, addressed the issue of the disciplinary relevance of statements made by an employee in…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI in the workplace: how to govern risks, data, and security (Agenda digitale, 29 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Martina De Angeli)

The spread of artificial intelligence tools used without corporate authorization exposes businesses to risks involving personal data, confidential information, know-how, and cybersecurity. To govern Shadow AI, organizations need…

24 Sep 2026

The concept of “territorial scope” in a non-compete agreement (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Alessandro Ferrari)

Interpretative issues in light of the most recent case law on the nullity of non-compete agreements due to the indeterminacy of territorial scope By an order issued on…