The Supreme Court of Italy, in its ruling 31866/2024, clarified the limits of dismissal for just cause concerning conduct that occurs outside the workplace.
The case
The case concerns an employee, a bus driver, dismissed for just cause after being sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment for charges including sexual assault, domestic abuse, and physical violence.
Following the appeal of the dismissal, in which the employee argued that his conduct was unrelated to his work activities, both the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal of Italy upheld the legitimacy of the dismissal for just cause.
The Italian Court of Appeal ruled that the employee’s behaviour, which was committed over a long period of time and involved several serious offences (including “sexual assault against his wife, mistreatment with humiliation and domineering behaviour, considered to be habitual, as well as physical violence”), justified the dismissal for just cause.
This was also due to the concrete risk that the employee, a bus driver, could lose self-control and fail to fulfil his essential duties of respect and care towards service users or third parties, given that his responsibilities included driving vehicles in traffic and constant interaction with the public.
The Court of Appeal of Italy, in determining the legitimacy of the dismissal, also took into account the employer’s duty of care, both towards third parties concerning the suitability of staff interacting with the public (under Article 2043 of the Civil Code) and towards its own employees (under Article 2087 of the Civil Code). Additionally, the Court took into account the employee’s previous disciplinary issues, including acts of insubordination and loss of control.
The employee challenged the decision of the Court of Appeal and appealed to the Italian Supreme Court on several grounds.
The decision of the Supreme Court
In upholding the judgment of the Italian Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court held that:
- unlawful conduct committed outside the workplace may have disciplinary relevance, since the employee is not only obliged to carry out the duties assigned to him, but also has an additional obligation to refrain from engaging in behaviour outside the workplace that could harm the moral and material interests of the employer or undermine the relationship of trust with the employer,
- in the present case, behaviour outside the workplace that has criminal relevance and has resulted in a final conviction is certainly included in the legal concept of dismissal for just cause. This conduct, even in the context of interpersonal or family relations, involved a disregard for the dignity of others and forms of physical and psychological violence that were not occasional but habitual, especially when the employee’s duties, such as those of a bus driver in public service, involve constant interaction with the public and require strict respect for users and the ability to maintain control.
The Supreme Court also stated that the Italian Court of Appeal did not establish an automatic link between the criminal conviction and the dismissal for just cause, but correctly recognized the negative impact of the criminal conduct on the proper performance of the employee’s duties, which are designed to protect the users of public services. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal correctly took into account the appellant’s previous disciplinary record, which indicates insubordination and a loss of control.
Other related insights:
