Categories: Insights, Case Law


1 May 2017

Minutes of the conciliation meeting: voided if the worker has been deceived

The Court of Cassation, with judgement No. 8260 dated 30 March 2017, reforming the judgement of the Court of Appeal with jurisdiction in the territory, accepted the complaints of a worker who had signed the minutes of a conciliation meeting at the union’s and then requested them to be voided with the goal of having the court verify the invalidity of the dismissal ordered during a collective dismissal procedure. In particular, the worker asserted that in the case in hand, there was defect in consent deriving from a deceiving manoeuvre that led him to sign the minutes of conciliation on the assumption that his professional position fell among those in excess and that such assumption, shortly after, proved to be false when the company hired another employee to hold the same position he had held previously. According to the Court of Cassation, the judges in charge of the matter were incorrect in not assessing whether the behaviour of the employer company was such to deceive the worker. This because, even a «conduct of malicious silence» may lead to deceit and, therefore, to defect of consent based on fraudulent non-disclosure. In fact, according to the Court of Cassation, also in the employment contract, lack of disclosure and reluctance from one of the parties regarding situations of interest to the counter-party, whenever such reluctance is part of an overall pre-planned behaviour, with malice or trickery, intended to implement the deceit being pursued, represent fraudulent non-disclosure pursuant to article 1439 of the civil code. According to such principle, the Court of Cassation then ordered the Court of Appeal to verify the corporate conduct regarding fraudulent non-disclosure against 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

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…

16 Sep 2026

Did you know that… repeated violations of company procedures may justify the dismissal of a store manager?

The Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section), in Order No. 25231 of 11 September 2026, upheld the lawfulness of the dismissal for just cause of a store manager who…