The Court of Cassation, with judgement No. 22295/2017, ruled that notification of dismissal of a worker sent by registered letter to the employee’s old address of residence is valid if he/she failed to communicate the change of residence within the terms referred in the National Collective Bargaining Agreement (CCNL). In this specific case, the employer, having realised during the process that a change of address had occurred for the concerned employee, subsequently sent to the employee’s new address a second notice of dismissal. The Court as well as the Court of Appeal declared void the second dismissal notice, since it occurred after the 6-day deadline established by the National Collective Bargaining Agreement (CCNL) for the sector, and declared irrelevant the first dismissal since it was sent to the wrong address. The Court of Cassation did not share the same opinion. The latter, referring to the provision of the national collective bargaining agreement (CCNL) according to which workers are required to communicate any changes in residence and domicile, stated that this provision “imposes, also in compliance with the principle of good faith and correctness which governs the employment relationship, that the worker must communicate in writing any subsequent changes in residence or domicile in order to promptly inform the employer of the address where he/she can be found”. Consequently, according to the Court opinion, the first dismissal had to be deemed as validly notified to the employee, since assumption of knowledge of such correspondence would have occurred for the employee.