Categories: Insights, Publications


31 Jul 2019

Legitimate dismissal even with a minimum reduction in revenue (Il Quotidiano del Lavoro de Il Sole 24 Ore, 1 August 2019 – Enrico De Luca, Antonella Iacobellis)

The Court of Cassation reiterated that the judge’s review cannot also concern the merits of the employer’s management choices, and a minimum reduction in revenue, if objectively linked to the expulsion measure, can be considered suitable to justify dismissal. The background that the Court of Justice, with its judgement of 18 July 2019, No 19302, examined was, very briefly, the following. A worker applied to the Court of First Instance for a declaration that the dismissal ordered to him was unlawful on the grounds that he was opposed to the employer’s decision to convert his employment relationship from full-time to part-time. The Court of Appeal, in confirming the first instance decision that had accepted the worker’s application, pointed out that it was obvious that the company’s balance sheet for the year prior to the dismissal had recorded a profit for the year and a reduction in liabilities. In addition, according to the District Court, the accounting entries and the depositions of the witnesses showed a slight decrease in profit from 2008 to 2010, although the operating results remained positive. And in order to face the described and slight negative drop in the profit margin, the employer decided to transform the employment relationship of some employees, including the complainant, from full time to part time. Therefore, the economic situation described above could not be considered as justifying the redundancy in question. The employer appealed against the decision on the substance of the case in Cassation on two grounds, the first of which relating to the incorrect assessment of the non-recurrence of the justified objective ground. In the first grounds for appeal, in other words, the conflict was declared between what was stated in the judgement under appeal and what was stated several times by the Court of Cassation, “according to which even reasons aimed at improving management efficiency or increasing the profitability of the business, which lead to a real change in the organisational structure through the abolition of a job, may justify individual dismissal on objective grounds”. In addition, the employer pointed out: – in a small company such as yours, not even the slightest but constant reduction in revenue from 2008 to 2010 can be underestimated;                                   – that it was only because of the worker’s failure to agree to move to a part-time scheme that he was dismissed for justified objective reasons. On this point, the courts of law have specified that the judicial review of the lawfulness of dismissal must be substantiated by verification: (i) the existence of the objective reason that the employer has declared to be the basis of the same; (ii) the existence of the causal link between the reason ascertained and the suppression of the employment position.

 

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…