Categories: Insights, Case Law


26 Feb 2018

The burden of proving the achievement of the objectives to receive payment of the related bonus rests on the employee

In Judgment no. 1712/2017, the Milan Court of Appeal has dealt with the issue of the omission by the employer of the annual objectives linked to the payment of a bonus. In this case, in the Court’s opinion, the employee claiming payment of the bonus is encumbered with the burden of “… producing and proving his achievement of the objectives that, according to the principles of fairness and good faith in performing a contract, should have been reasonably assigned with a view of continuity with previously set objectives and in relation to the company potential and contingent market conditions”. This is so because the omission in question constitutes contract breach, since the employer is obliged to assign the annual objectives, and does not fall within the scope of application of Article 1359, Italian Civil Code (relied on in the case at hand by the worker) according to which “the condition (editor’s note: achievement of the objectives linked to payment of the bonus) should be considered fulfilled if this was missing for reasons attributable to the party that had no interest in the fulfilment thereof.” This provision – according to the Court – shall apply only in case of a future and uncertain event, on the occurrence of which the effectiveness of an agreement depends. This is so when an employer that has assigned the objectives has engaged in a conduct that prevents workers from achieving them; nevertheless, also in this case, the worker should prove not only the interest of the employer against fulfilment of the condition but also that the objective would have been achieved had the employer not thwarted it.

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…