Catégories: Insights, Publications · News


14 Mai 2015

Managers have the right to substitute compensation for holidays if company necessities are demonstrated (Il Quotidiano del Lavoro – Il Sole 24 Ore, 15 May 2015)

The case examined by the Labour Section of the Cassation Court, with its ruling no. 8791 of 30 April 2015 is based on the following events. A healthcare director – restricted by contract to not take holidays in the months of August, September and October – submitted an appeal to the Court of Pistoia in order to obtain, consistent with his contract, payment of substitute compensation for holidays not taken. The Court rejected this appeal, so the manager petitioned the competent Appellate Court, which confirmed the ruling of the court of first instance. Specifically, the Appellate Court of Florence pointed out that the agreements between the parties were intended to leave the top manager full autonomy in the decision to determine his holiday period and that the latter, who bore the burden of proof, had not attached and proven the occurrence of exceptional circumstances, unplanned and unpredictable, that had objectively prevented him from taking his holidays. Excluding that in the past the employer had denied holidays or made any objection to taking them, the territorial Court reported that the manager could freely use the remaining nine months of the year for choosing when to take his holidays, with the exception of particular and extraordinary company needs preventing such use. Opposed to such decision, the manager appealed to the Court of Cassation, while the employer challenged by filing a cross-appeal. At the end of the hearing the Supreme Court ruled to reject the appeal, sentencing the petitioner to pay court costs as well. Among the grounds for the appeal the manager cites, specifically, the infringement of article 2109 of the Italian Civil Code and article 36 of the Italian Constitution, for having overlooked that the exclusion of holidays during a certain period is suitable interference to give the right to substitute compensation. In declaring this reason groundless the Cassation, citing previous cases, reiterated that, in employment contracts with public administrations, the mere circumstance of failure to use holidays does not give the right to corresponding economic relief if the employee does not prove that it was caused by exceptional and motivated work requirements or force majeure. The Court with specific regard to the manager’s position, confirms the legal principle already stated with previous rulings, confirming that “the manager who, despite having the power to assign himself a period of holidays without any interference from the employer, by not exercising such power and thus not using the period of annual holiday, he does not have the right to substitute compensation for unused holidays, unless he proves the occurrence of absolutely exceptional and objective company needs preventing such use”.

Source:

Il Quotidiano del Lavoro – Il Sole 24 Ore

Inscrivez-vous à notre lettre d’information

Contacts

Vous avez besoin d'informations ? Écrivez-nous et notre équipe d'experts vous répondra dans les plus brefs délais.

Remplissez le formulaire

Autres nouveautés et insights

12 Oct 2026

« AI tools, remote work and confidential data: employer liability in a borderless environment » – Conférence annuelle de l’IBA 2026

À l’occasion de l’IBA Annual Conference 2026 à Copenhague, notre Managing Partner Vittorio De Luca a animé, aux côtés de Anne Morel (BSP, Luxembourg), une session consacrée à…

1 Oct 2026

E-mail professionnelle et contrôles défensifs : quand le RGPD et le droit du travail ne coïncident pas

L’affaire Piaggio illustre de manière particulièrement évidente comment, face aux mêmes faits, des appréciations profondément différentes peuvent coexister selon la perspective adoptée. Par une décision du 13 juin…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI et réintégration : le choix du salarié entraîne la perte de l’allocation

Sommaire La Cour de cassation, par son récent arrêt n° 24981 du 3 septembre 2026, a jugé que, lorsqu’un licenciement est annulé avec ordre de réintégration en application…

1 Oct 2026

Saviez-vous que… un témoignage rendu en justice peut avoir une portée disciplinaire et, dans les cas les plus graves, justifier un licenciement ?

La Cour de cassation italienne, section Travail, par son ordonnance n° 25687 du 22 septembre 2026, s’est prononcée sur la portée disciplinaire des déclarations faites par un salarié…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI en entreprise : comment maîtriser les risques, les données et la sécurité (Agenda digitale, 29 Septembre 2026 – Vittorio De Luca et Martina De Angeli)

La diffusion d’outils d’intelligence artificielle utilisés sans autorisation de l’entreprise expose les organisations à des risques liés aux données personnelles, aux informations confidentielles, au savoir-faire et à la…

24 Sep 2026

Le concept de « territoire » dans le cadre de la clause de non-concurrence (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca et Alessandro Ferrari)

Les problématiques d’interprétation à la lumière de la jurisprudence la plus récente en matière de nullité de la clause de non-concurrence pour imprécision de la limitation territoriale Par…