Categories: Insights, Case Law

Tag: Dismissal, Licenziamento


27 Aug 2017

It is lawful to dismiss an employee for profit reasons, even if there is no [financial] crisis situation

The Court of Cassation, with judgement No. 19655 dated 10 August 2017, has confirmed the choice of an employer to dismiss one of its employees in order to increase management efficiency and business profit, even if lacking a [financial] crisis situation. In the case in hand, the employer decided to remove a department when a specific job order failed to materialize, in order to maintain unaltered the business profit. This choice, in the opinion of the competent Court, cannot be argued. The consequent dismissal, according to the Court, must be deemed lawful since it was for reasons related to the productive activity, work management and normal operation of the activity. Therefore, once having verified the effectiveness of such reorganization and the consequent removal of the job position, dismissal had to be considered fully valid. This judgement falls within a case-law trend that is becoming increasingly more common (see judgements No. 25201/2016, 25197/2013, 7474/2012 and 15157/2011), even if it was not issued unanimously (see judgement of the Court of Cassation No. 14871/2017 according to which in order to have economic dismissal, in addition to corporate reorganization, it is also necessary to prove the effective need to reduce costs to face unfavourable 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

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…