Categories: Insights, Case Law


27 Aug 2017

The objective nature of discriminatory dismissal and the subjective nature of retaliatory dismissal

The Court of Cassation, with judgement No. 14456 dated 9 June 2017, has intervened again on the distinction between discriminatory dismissal and retaliatory dismissal. The Court, intervening on the matter detailed in judgement No. 6575 dated 5 April 2016 issued by the Court itself, clarified that discriminatory dismissal is objective since it is based on the breaching of pre-established laws both at the national and European level in force to protect specific interests such as political orientation, religious rights, belonging to a union or participation to union work, race, language, gender, disability, age or sexual orientation or personal beliefs of the employee (see art. 3, Law No. 108/1990; art. 4, Law No. 604/1966; art. 15, Law No. 300/1970). On the contrary, retaliatory dismissal does not have an objective nature, and it does not operate in an automatic fashion. In such case, not only the employer’s reasons must be unjustified but it is also necessary that the reason deemed unlawful is exclusive and decisive such as an employer’s reaction to an employee’s lawful behaviour, that however is unwelcome. Essentially, a retaliatory dismissal and a discriminatory dismissal are two well distinct cases, being the qualifying element in the case of (i) discriminatory dismissal represented by the discriminatory conduct and (ii) that of the retaliatory dismissal represented by the unlawfulness of the reason (exclusive and decisive).

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

8 Apr 2026

Management of corporate email after termination of employment: the limits according to the Italian Data Protection Authority

The Italian Data Protection Authority (i.e. “Garante per la protezione dei dati personali”) has once again provided guidance on how employers should manage corporate email accounts after the…

8 Apr 2026

Oral dismissal: the burden of proof on the employee

With order no. 4077 of 23 February 2026, the Italian Supreme Court addressed the issue of oral dismissal, holding that an employee challenging the termination of the employment…

8 Apr 2026

DID YOU KNOW THAT… incompatibility between colleagues may justify the transfer of an employee? 

The Italian Supreme Court, with order no. 4198 of 25 February 2026, held that an employee’s transfer may be lawfully implemented also in the presence of a situation…

7 Apr 2026

The boundary between rest and inactivity in the management of working hours (AIDP – HR Online, 7 April 2026 – Vittorio De Luca, Alesia Hima)

In the organizational language of companies, terms such as “breaks,” “waiting times,” or “downtime” are often used. In operational practice, these expressions tend to be treated almost as…

17 Mar 2026

Equal pay: green light for the decree on pay equality and wage transparency (People are People, 16 March 2026 – Claudia Cerbone, Martina De Angeli)

Claudia Cerbone and Martina De Angeli, professionals at the De Luca & Partners firm, author this article dedicated to the draft legislative decree approved last February 5 by…

10 Mar 2026

The transfer of the employee is lawful when there is incompatibility with the company environment (Camera di Commercio Italo-Francese, 10 March 2026 – Vittorio De Luca, Silvia Zulato)

With Order No. 4198 of 25 February 2026, the Italian Supreme Court (Court of Cassation) – Labour Section – reaffirmed that a situation of environmental incompatibility may justify…