Categories: Insights, Case Law


20 Oct 2016

Collective dismissal: compensatory indemnity for failure to clarify selection criteria

The Court of Cassation with judgement No. 19320 published on 29 September 2016, stated that concerning a collective dismissal the violation of Article 4, paragraph 9 of Law 223/1991, on failure to clarify the factual assumptions on the basis of which the employees to be dismissed were selected, was merely a matter of form. It follows that, according to the Supreme Court of Cassation, pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 5 of Law 223/1991, in such a case, an employee is entitled to receive only the all-inclusive compensatory indemnity ranging between a minimum of 12 and a maximum of 24 monthly payments from the actual final remuneration received, and not the reintegration in the workplace as well. The latter, in the opinion of the Supreme Court of Cassation, is due only in the event of selection criteria violation. The law principle affirmed by the Supreme Court of Cassation represents the proper application of the provisions contained in Article 5, paragraph 3 of Law 223/1991 considering the wording of the provision that grants compensatory indemnity in the case of violation of the procedures mentioned in Article 4, paragraph 12 of Law 223/1991 and, therefore, in case of violation of the information referred to in Article 4, paragraph 9 of Law 223/1991.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Contact

Need information? Write to us and our team of experts will respond as soon as possible.

Fill in the form

More news and insights

1 Sep 2026

Company files deleted from the PC: dismissal lawful even without proof of damage

The matter arises from the disciplinary dismissal of an employee performing general secretarial duties who, upon returning the company computer following a change in her duties, handed back…

1 Sep 2026

Overtime work: a summary schedule is not enough, employees must provide strict evidence of both the hours worked and the extent of the overtime performed

With order no. 20700 of 18 June 2026, the Italian Supreme Court once again addressed the issue of overtime work, reiterating that employees claiming overtime pay must strictly…

1 Sep 2026

Did you know that… an individual allowance that has remained unchanged for years may become non-absorbable?

In judgment no. 24475 of 5 August 2026, the Employment Section of the Italian Supreme Court confirmed that an individual allowance (i.e. “superminimo”), although normally subject to the…

3 Aug 2026

Pay Transparency: the first requests from employees are starting to arrive (Il Sole 24 Ore, 3 august 2026 – Vittorio De Luca)

Two months after the decree. Since Legislative Decree 96/2026 came into force on 7 June, according to a flash survey conducted by GIDP, 8% of HR directors have…

30 Jul 2026

Corporate controls and data protection: what balance?

A recent judgment of the Court of Pisa, No. 800 of 13 June 2026, addresses a topic of particular interest for companies: the delicate balance between the protection…

30 Jul 2026

Unfair dismissal and reinstatement: the employee must repay the payment in lieu of notice

With order no. 22187 of 28 June 2026, the Italian Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether payment in lieu of notice paid to an employee must be…