Categories: News

9 Jun 2011

Court of Cassation: de facto administrator is not liable anytime

Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 22334/2011, stated that de facto administrator of a company is liable for breach of rules regarding work safety but solely in the circumstances of proof of interference in managing the company. The proof that the interference has occurred afterwards the facts at issue – though it is significant in view of the final decision – does not entail the existence of a de facto administrator as an automatic consequence. Therefore, on the debating matter, the Supreme Court – far from departing from the law and case-law on employer’s liability – excluded the liability of a de facto administrator for lack of proof on the said interference when the circumstances at issue occurred.
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

19 Oct 2026

From Innovation to Governance: The Impact of the AI Act on HR Processes, between Compliance, Transparency and Accountability (AIDP – HR Online, 19 October 2026 – Vittorio De Luca, Martina De Angela)

In recent years, artificial intelligence has evolved from an experimental technology into a tool that is increasingly integrated into the day-to-day activities of HR functions. Among other things,…

Read more
12 Oct 2026

“AI tools, remote work and confidential data: employer liability in a borderless environment” – IBA Conference 2026

At the IBA Annual Conference 2026 in Copenhagen, our Managing Partner Vittorio De Luca moderated a panel on one of the most pressing challenges facing employers today: the…

Read more
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…

Read more
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…

Read more
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…

Read more
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…

Read more