Categories: Insights, Case Law


27 May 2018

Lawful dismissal for justified objective reasons not based on an economic crisis

The Court of Cassation, with judgement No. 9127 dated 12 April 2018 reviewed the case of dismissal for justified objective reasons not supported by a negative economic trend. In this case, the judges reviewing the case had deemed the employer’s dismissal unlawful because “the unfavourable situations were not such as to have a decisive influence on the normal productive activity of the sector“. The judges, on the other hand, pointed out that – although it was not possible to acknowledge the presence of a negative economic trend within the company and sector of the employer – it was unquestionable that the latter had indeed led to a corporate reorganisation, aimed at improving production efficiency and organisation, and therefore the suppression of the position of the dismissed employee. In light of this fact, the Supreme Court decided to transfer the case for judgement to the Court of Appeals having jurisdiction. Basically, in a dismissal for justified objective reasons a negative economic trend of the company does not represent a factual condition that the employer must prove, being sufficient the existence of reasons tied to productivity and business organisation such as to determine the effective removal of a specific job position. Moreover, from the reasoning of the Court it emerges that these reasons may include reasons aimed at a better managerial or productive efficiency or an increase in the profitability of the company. This is because, pursuant to art. 41 of the Constitution, the choice of the employer cannot be judged in terms of adequacy and appropriateness.

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…