Categories: Insights, Publications

Tag: atto di delega, infortunio, sicurezza sul lavoro


14 Jan 2020

The members of the Board of Directors are always liable in the event of an accident, unless there a formal deed of proxy which cannot be substituted by de facto proxy (Il Quotidiano del Lavoro de Il Sole 24 Ore, 14 January 2020 – Alberto De Luca, Luca Cairoli)

The Court of Cassation, with judgement no. 54 filed on 3 January 2020, returned to express its position regarding the distribution of responsibilities for accident prevention obligations in limited companies. Expressing a general principle, the Court first of all pointed out that in corporations the employer’s obligations under the law relating to the prevention of accidents”are incumbent on all members of the board of directors without distinction, except in the case of delegation, validly conferred, of the position of guarantee“. In the case in question, a managing director of a limited company had appealed against the ruling of the Florence Court of Appeal, confirming the judgement at first instance, by which he was held liable for the crime of injury through negligence, for having caused personal injury to a worker injured in the performance of his work by omissive conduct consisting in not having adequately fulfilled his obligations in terms of safety at work. The Managing Director appealed to the Court of Cassation against this decision. Specifically, the appellant complained first of all that the Court of Appeal, in attributing to him responsibility for the accident, had not taken into account that there were other persons within the company organisation specifically designated to manage employment relations in their entirety. In particular, the appellant managing director argued that in his case the principle of cumulative responsibility at the top management of the company should not apply, in the presence of a person outside the Board of Directors, acting as the person in charge, as this latter is also exclusively responsible for compliance with obligations regarding safety at work.

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

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…

16 Sep 2026

Did you know that… repeated violations of company procedures may justify the dismissal of a store manager?

The Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section), in Order No. 25231 of 11 September 2026, upheld the lawfulness of the dismissal for just cause of a store manager who…