Case Law

Supreme Court, with sentence no. 14197 of August 7, 2012 has established that companies can use private investigators in order to verify if employees commit a crime and that such investigations can concern the employees only and not their cars or bags.

The Court of Cassation, with sentence No. 4709/2012, stated that the employee may refuse to execute his/her working activity if the transfer measure is not properly motivated.

The Court of Cassation, with sentence No. 11465/2012, stated the principle based on which a company, which needs to obtain a more efficient management in order to face an economic downturn, may dismiss an employee for “justified grounds” (so called “giustificato motivo”).

The Supreme Court, with the sentence no. 9965 of the April 11th, 2012, stated that the employer who reinstates only partially an executive of the company union representative, just paying the salary and acknowledging him/her the trade rights but refusing his/her work performance, is subject to administrative sanction provided for by the art. 10, par. 8, of the Law no. 300/70 (so called “Statuto dei Lavoratori”) (i.e. payment of an amount equal to the daily wage due to the employee, for each day of delay, in favour of the INPS Fund for the pensions adjustment).

Court of Cassation, with the sentence no. 9644 of the June 13th, 2012, stated that with reference to the disciplinary sanctions the advertising guarantee of the disciplinary code through the post accessible to everyone, is not applied in case the disciplinary proceeding is referred to circumstances regarding a breach of basic duties related to the employment relationship.