Categories: Insights, Case Law

Tag: CCNL


5 Jan 2021

Internal regulations: penalty clauses enforceable only if specifically accepted

The Supreme Court of Cassation, by Order no. 27422 dated 1 December 2020, established that the clauses of the national collective agreement stating that workers are required to respect not only the provisions contained therein but also those established in internal regulations does not automatically bind employees to the compensation obligation envisaged therein in the event of a violation of its provisions.

Facts of the case

In this case, a company had made a withholding from an employee’s pay packet in relation to reckless safekeeping of property after 56 tickets were taken from the same after a bag was stolen. This was done by virtue of a provision contained in an internal circular, previously communicated to employees, according to which they were obliged to compensate a certain amount in the event that tickets were stolen. In the company’s opinion, the provision was immediately applicable precisely by virtue of the reference made by the industry’s National Collective Labour Agreement to internal regulations, with which employees were required to comply. The Supreme Court of Cassation was not of the same opinion.

The Supreme Court of Cassation’s ruling

According to the Supreme Court, the indication of compensable damage in a circular or in an internal regulation for the violation of one of its provisions equates to a penalty clause which, as such, only binds employees in the face of their express acceptance.

In the opinion of the Supreme Court of Cassation, the penalty clause is a means of enforcing specific contractual obligations and constitutes anagreed early settlement” of the damage deriving from their violation. The penalty clause presupposes, by its characteristics, a meeting of wills which the parties formalise in a deed, in the absence of which its application cannot be enforced. The establishment of the penalty does not fall among the employer’s unilateral powers, as its specific negotiation and formal approval are its irreplaceable presuppositions.

Therefore, regulations, circulars and service orders that envisage an obligation to compensate a certain amount, in order to be binding, may not simply be communicated or affixed to the company notice board. A deed of acceptance and adhesion from each individual worker is required.

Other insight related:

Did you know that… adopting a policy on IT tools allows using the data collected also for disciplinary purposes?

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

20 May 2026

Webinar “May 1st Decree: Key Updates and what’s New” –  HR Coffee with De Luca & Partners

On the occasion of our webinar “An HR Coffee with De Luca Partners,” the speakers Silvia Zulato, Senior Associate, and Alessandro Riccardo Polli from the Labour Consulting Division…

12 May 2026

Legitimate dismissal for false attendance reporting and misuse of access system data (Camera di Commercio Francese in Italia – Vittorio De Luca, Silvia Zulato)

With Order No. 7985 of 31 March 2026, the Italian Supreme Court – Labour Section – confirmed the lawfulness of a dismissal for just cause imposed on an…

30 Apr 2026

Webinar “Bonuses: What Do You Need to Know About Objectives?” – HR Coffee with De Luca & Partners

Yesterday, during our first webinar “HR Coffee with De Luca & Partners", the speakers Vittorio De Luca, Managing Partner, and Alessandra Zilla, Managing Associate at De Luca &…

27 Apr 2026

Management of corporate email after termination of employment: the Italian Data Protection Authority extends the right of access to all emails in the individual email account 

“An employee may access the messages in their corporate email account and the documents stored on their computer after the termination of employment. Any limitations must be justified by specific…

27 Apr 2026

Unemployment benefits and resignation following transfer beyond 50 km: distance alone is not sufficient, employer’s breach must be proven  

With order no. 10559 of 21 April 2026, the Italian Supreme Court addressed the issue of unemployment benefits (i.e. “NASpI”) in the context of resignations for just cause following…

27 Apr 2026

DID YOU KNOW THAT… the probationary period clause is null and void if the duties are described in generic terms? 

The Court of Milan, with judgment no. 683 of 3 April 2026, reaffirmed that a probationary clause (i.e. “patto di prova”) is valid only if it contains a specific indication of the duties subject to…