With Order No. 7982 of March 31, 2026, the Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section) held that a message sent within a private chat may constitute just cause for dismissal when, due to its content and the manner in which it is shared, it is capable of undermining the relationship of trust with the employer.
The case originated from the dismissal of an employee, a head of office, who had sent a voice message in a WhatsApp chat in which, in addition to expressing offensive remarks about colleagues and superiors, she disclosed internal information concerning the procedures for checking the green pass and suggested possible ways to circumvent such controls. The content of the message was later disseminated externally and became accessible on a Facebook page.
The Court of Appeal of Venice deemed the dismissal lawful, emphasizing the overall seriousness of the conduct, the role held by the employee, and the potential harm to the company’s organization and to the security measures in place.
The Supreme Court upheld this decision. First of all, the judges of legitimacy ruled out that the “private” nature of the WhatsApp chat is, in itself, sufficient to exclude the disciplinary relevance of the conduct. The fact that the communication took place within a group implies the presence of multiple recipients, who may be regarded as third parties in relation to the author of the statement.
From another perspective, the Court attached particular importance to the content of the message, which was considered to display a clear harmful intent. The offensive expressions directed at colleagues and superiors, combined with the disclosure of confidential company information and the indication of ways to circumvent internal procedures, were deemed capable of significantly undermining the relationship of trust.
The Court also distinguished between the intention to make the statement within the chat and the subsequent dissemination of the message outside it. In particular, the judges clarified that, even in the absence of proof of an intention to disclose, the foreseeability that the content could circulate beyond the group is sufficient to establish a form of liability, thereby increasing the overall seriousness of the conduct.
From this perspective, the fact that the communication took place through a tool belonging to the private sphere was not considered sufficient to neutralize the disciplinary wrongdoing, especially where the content of the message is objectively harmful to the company’s organization.
The ruling therefore confirms that communications made within private chats may also have disciplinary relevance and justify dismissal where they are capable of harming the employer’s interests and seriously undermining the relationship of trust.