Case Law

The Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 14071/2013, stated that the companies which have been punished for the breach of the rules concerning security on workplace are not entitled to the fiscal benefits and to the employment incentives.

The Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 13240 of May 28, 2013, clarified that the partner of a general partnership is liable for the missed payment of unpaid social security contributions by the company. In the general partnerships all partners are jointly liable without limits for corporate obligations.

Constitutional Court, with sentence no. 107 of May 22, 2013, stated that, in case of fixed term contract for replacement reasons, the employee name must be specified in writing. Nevertheless, for companies with a complex organization, is enough to make reference to employees who are absent in a specific company function.

The Supreme Court, IV criminal section, with sentence no. 21628 of May 20, 2013, confirmed that, regarding security in the work place, the liability for the injury at work is charged on the members of the Board of Directors, unless, throughout a deliberation, the guarantee position is assigned to just one of the directors.

The subordinate employee has a binding obligation of “correct and timely information to the employer” of his/her incapability to carry out the duties he has been assigned to, starting from his own presence on the work place.

The Court of Voghera, with the decision of March 14, 2013, confirmed that when the dismissal for just cause is not proportioned to the employee’s behavior it is unlawful, but implies just a compensation and not the reinstatement if the contested behavior occurred and the collective agreement does not provide a conservative penalty for the employee’s lack.

Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 8863 of April 11, 2013, stated that within a contract of services the employment relationships are not charged on the principal if its employees, having though unlawfully exercised the directive power on the contractor employees’, were not empowered with the necessary powers to behave in the name and on behalf of the company.

Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 9073/13, stated that the missed reinstatement of the employee unlawfully terminated has to be indemnified by the employer with a pecuniary sanction equal to 20% of the wages to be paid by way of damages.