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

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…