Categories: Insights, Case Law


29 Jan 2017

As part of a contract, the burden of proof regarding safety in the workplace must be borne by the customer

The Court of Cassation, with judgment No. 798 dated 13 January 2017, stated that the customer, whenever the work environment remains available to the latter, shall take all appropriate measures to protect the well-being and health of workers, including the contractor’s employees. In particular, according to the Court, these measures consist in (i) providing workers with adequate information about hazards; (Ii) preparing the necessary actions to ensure the safety of plants and (iii) cooperating with the contractor in introducing protection devices and preventing the hazards associated with the workplace and the contracted activity, especially if characterized by the use of hazardous machinery. Therefore, in the opinion of the Court, in the case of accidents in the workplace, the responsibility must be borne by the injured worker if the accident occurred due to an irregular behaviour, considered undisputable and excessive with respect to the work procedure and the instructions received, so as to be considered as the sole cause of the event. In the absence of such behaviour by the worker, the extent to which his/her possible negligent behaviour contributed to the event is irrelevant both under the causal point of view and as regards the compensation amount. Essentially, any imprudence, negligence or inexperience of the workers is unsuitable to exclude the causal link with the negligent conduct of the customer if it failed to take all the preventive measures necessary to carry out the work required by the actual working conditions.

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

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…

30 Jul 2026

Did you know that… an employee’s natural incapacity does not prevent the time limit for challenging a dismissal from running?

In judgment no. 23486 of 18 July 2026, the Joint Chambers of the Italian Supreme Court (i.e. “Corte di Cassazione”) held that the natural incapacity of an employee…

22 Jul 2026

An employee may not steer clients toward a competitor before resigning (Camera di Commercio Francese in Italia, 22 July 2026 – Vittorio De Luca, Silvia Zulato)

With Order No. 1723 of 26 May 2026, the Italian Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione) confirmed the liability of an employee who, prior to the termination of his…

20 Jul 2026

Access to Naspi (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 20 July 2026 – Vittorio De Luca e Alessandra Zilla)

Regulatory Framework  The New Social Insurance for Employment (NASpI), introduced by Legislative Decree No. 22 of 4 March 2015, is the primary income support scheme for employees who…