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

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…