Categories: Insights, Publications · News, Publications

Tag: Licenziamento collettivo


14 Jun 2021

Collective dismissal: irrelevant initiation of multiple “Fornero procedures” (Norme & Tributi Plus Diritto – Il Sole 24 Ore, 14 June 2021 – Vittorio De Luca, Alessandra Zilla)14 June 2021

With the recent ruling no. 15118 of 31 May 2021, the Court of Cassation ruled that the initiation of multiple individual dismissal procedures for objective justified reasons under Article 7 of Law 604/66 does not count when calculating the minimum number of five dismissals required to open collective dismissal procedures.

The ruling stems from the dismissal for objective justified reasons of a worker who, in challenging her dismissal, claimed the company had failed to initiate the collective dismissal procedure. This is despite the fact the company had informed the local employment office within 120 days of its intention to dismiss seven employees for objective justified reasons. All employees had been terminated by mutual consent.

The worker’s claims were rejected in the first instance. In the second instance, they were upheld by the Court of Appeal of Trieste, which declared that the dismissal was illegal due to the failure to initiate the collective dismissal procedure.

The company appealed to the Court of Cassation against the local court’s decision, claiming violation and misapplication of art. 24 of Law 223/91 because the Court of Appeal wrongly equated the intention to dismiss under Art. 7 of Law 604/66 with a real dismissal. In upholding the worker’s appeal, the Court of Cassation based its decision on literal and systematic arguments.

As stated by the Court of Cassation, the expression “intends to dismiss” contained in Art. 24 of Law 223/91 constitutes a clear manifestation of the will to dismiss, while the expression “must declare the intention to dismiss for objective justified reasons” contained in art. 7 of Law 604/66 aims to initiate a compensation (or conciliation) procedure before the Local Employment Office – DTL (now Labour Inspectorate – ITL) and cannot be considered equivalent in itself to dismissal.

Continue reading the full version published in Norme & Tributi Plus Diritto of Il Sole 24 Ore.

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

15 Apr 2026

Dismissal deemed valid based on a message sent in a WhatsApp chat (Camera di Commercio Italo-Francese – Vittorio De Luca, Silvia Zulato)

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…

13 Apr 2026

De Luca & Partners, the boutique turns 50 years old (MAG – Legalcommunity, 13 April 2026 – Vincenzo De Luca, Vittorio De Luca e Roberta Padula)

It was 1976 when labor lawyer Vincenzo De Luca decided to open his firm in Milan. He came from Barletta and rented a small office in Largo Corsia…

13 Apr 2026

Organization and algorithms: here are the rights to strengthen (L’Economia, Il Corriere della Sera, 13 April 2026 – Martina De Angeli)

“Artificial intelligence has a significant and direct impact on work organization and on personnel management models.” Martina De Angeli, senior associate at De Luca & Partners, has no…

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…