Categories: News

Tag: Corte Costituzionale


27 May 2022

Financial-based dismissals: a “manifest” lack of the fact is not necessary to obtain reinstatement protection

The Constitutional Court, in ruling 125 filed on 19 May 2022, expressed its opinion on paragraph 7 of art. 18, of law no. 300/1970 which recognises the reinstatement protection in cases of dismissal for justified objective reason, only if it is established that there is a “manifest lack” of the fact underlying the dismissal.

The Constitutional Court declared the above paragraph unconstitutional, limited to the word “manifest.” The Court specified that the fact underlying the dismissal is to be “traced back to what pertains to the effectiveness and genuineness of the entrepreneurial choice.” On these aspects the judge is called upon to carry out an assessment of legitimacy that cannot “encroach onto a review of appropriateness and opportunity” (see ruling no. 59 of 2021).

The manifest lack of the fact requirement is vague and lends itself to uncertainties, with consequent treatment inequalities. The existence of a fact is a difficult notion to classify because it suggests “a clear alternative, which the court’s assessment is called upon to resolve in positive or negative terms.”

The ruling stated that the manifest lack criterion, “is unconventional in the system of remedies, usually focused on the varying seriousness of the defects and not on an accidental contingency, linked to the linearity and celerity of the assessment.”

In disputes concerning dismissals for objective justified reason, there is complex evidence. The parties and the judge, must ascertain the existence or lack of a fact, which is a complex operation, and engage “in a further verification of the precise degree of the possible lack of the fact.” This would imply an “unreasonable and disproportionate burden” on the proceedings. The vagueness of the requirement would thus be accompanied by an unreasonable complication of the proceedings.

The Constitutional Court identified an imbalance between the goals the legislature had set (consisting in a fairer distribution of protections, through quicker and more easily predictable decisions) and the means adopted to achieve them.

Other related insights:

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

22 Oct 2026

Access to NASpI in light of recent case law (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 22 October 2026 – Vittorio De Luca e Alessandra Zilla)

The New Social Insurance for Employment (NASpI), established by Legislative Decree No. 22 of 4 March 2015, is the main income support measure for employees who have involuntarily…

19 Oct 2026

From Innovation to Governance: The Impact of the AI Act on HR Processes, between Compliance, Transparency and Accountability (AIDP – HR Online, 19 October 2026 – Vittorio De Luca, Martina De Angela)

In recent years, artificial intelligence has evolved from an experimental technology into a tool that is increasingly integrated into the day-to-day activities of HR functions. Among other things,…

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…