Case Law

Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 1693 of January 24, stated that the subordinate employee’s refusal of carrying out his work performance (e.g. in the case he/she is assigned to lower duties) can be lawful and, therefore, make unlawful the dismissal based on the principle of “self-protection” in the equivalent performances contract, if the refusal is balanced to the unlawful behavior of the employer and in compliance with the principle of good faith.

Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 1148/2013, stated that the maximum threshold of indemnity equal to 12 monthly wages, set by Law no. 183/2010 (so called “Collegato Lavoro”), in case the fixed term employment contract is converted in an open ended one, applies also in case of conversion of the temporary work (therefore, staff supply).

The Court of Cassation, with decision No. 106/2012, has stated that the employee, actually sick, cannot be dismissed only because he did not send the certificate in time, reducing the gravity of employee’s default.

Court of Milan, with sentence of November 28, 2012, stated that the breach of the obligation of so called repachage makes the dismissal for justified objective reason unlawful, but the consequence is just the indemnity for damages in favor of the terminated employee (and not the reinstatement), if the suppression of the job position is effective.

The Constitutional Court, with decision No. 287/2012, has decided that the reform of training provided for by Article 11 of Legislative Decree No. 138/2011 (converted into Law No. 148/2011) is unconstitutional because it invades the competences reserved exclusively to the legislative power of the Regions.

The Court of Cassation, with sentence No. 21028/2012, has stated that the employee who was not able to enjoy the holidays due to a long illness is entitled to their monetization even if the national collective agreement refers only to the enjoyment of the holidays and not to the indemnity in lieu (the latter, in fact, is an inalienable right guaranteed by the Constitution).

The labour section of Milan Court, with decision of November 14, 2012, has stated that the new Article 18 of Law No. 300/1970 (so called “Statuto dei Lavoratori”) is not applicable to the dismissals ordered before the date of entry into force of Law No. 92/2012 (so called “Fornero Reform”), i.e. before July 18, 2012, although the litigation started after that date.

The Court of cassation, labour section, with sentence no. 18921/12, stated that the employer who does not adopt the necessary measures for health protection on the work places is considered to be unfulfilling with respect to the employee.