Case Law

With its ruling no. 25682 of 28 October 2014, the Cassation Court established that it is illegal to dismiss a worker for having submitted company documents considered confidential during court proceedings undertaken by the employee to protect his job (in the case in hand, granting of a higher contractual level), since the right to defence is guaranteed by article 24 of the Constitution and has precedence over any company needs for confidentiality.

With ruling no. 25674 of 9 October 2014, filed on 4 December 2014, the Cassation Court once again intervened on the issue of control performed by employers using investigation agencies, confirming its legality when performed to protect company assets, as long as the investigation agency's control is limited "to illegal acts performed by employees not solely linked to mere failure to fulfil an obligation".

In Judgment No. 24525/2014, the Court of Cassation held that it is permissible to reinstate a dismissal voided for failure to observe the respite period by issuing a new act of dismissal based on the same conditions, where the employee gives notice of a new period of illness.

In Judgment No. 46820, entered last 12 November, the Court of Cassation held that obligations of supervision and control imposed on employers are not diminished with the appointment of a health and safety officer (Rssp), whose role is to provide direct assistance in support of, and not in substitution of, the employer in identifying risk factors.

In a ruling of 27 October 2014, the Court of Rome affirmed that the obligation to give a second change to employees dismissed for objectively justified reasons is not breached in the case of a temporary hiring one month before dismissal.