Categories: Insights, Case Law

Tag: Licenziamento


30 Oct 2017

Change of residence not notified: notification at the old address is valid

The Court of Cassation, with judgement No. 22295/2017, ruled that notification of dismissal of a worker sent by registered letter to the employee’s old address of residence is valid if he/she failed to communicate the change of residence within the terms referred in the National Collective Bargaining Agreement (CCNL). In this specific case, the employer, having realised during the process that a change of address had occurred for the concerned employee, subsequently sent to the employee’s new address a second notice of dismissal. The Court as well as the Court of Appeal declared void the second dismissal notice, since it occurred after the 6-day deadline established by the National Collective Bargaining Agreement (CCNL) for the sector, and declared irrelevant the first dismissal since it was sent to the wrong address.  The Court of Cassation did not share the same opinion. The latter, referring to the provision of the national collective bargaining agreement (CCNL) according to which workers are required to communicate any changes in residence and domicile, stated that this provision “imposes, also in compliance with the principle of good faith and correctness which governs the employment relationship, that the worker must communicate in writing any subsequent changes in residence or domicile in order to promptly inform the employer of the address where he/she can be found”. Consequently, according to the Court opinion, the first dismissal had to be deemed as validly notified to the employee, since assumption of knowledge of such correspondence would have occurred for the employee.

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…