Categories: Insights, Case Law


26 Feb 2018

The unilateral verbal withdrawal from a collective agreement is legitimate

In Judgment no. 2600 of 2 February 2018, the Court of Cassation reiterated that if the signatory parties to a second-level collective agreement have not expressly provided for the need to serve written notices for termination purposes, the employer’s verbal withdrawal can be considered valid. The case at hand concerned a collective agreement – which set out certain provisions regarding the award of cash bonuses – on an annual basis, with tacit renewal, unless in case of cancellation served by 31 January. A few workers claimed that they had not received payment of a portion of the bonus, and applied for an order for payment of the amounts envisaged in the collective agreement. On the other hand, the employer argued that said agreement was inapplicable, as the company had verbally cancelled it, in the course of a meeting with the trade unions held before 31 January. The Court of Appeal had upheld the claim of the workers, maintaining that, for a withdrawal to be effective, this must be made in a written form. The Supreme Court had a different view, believing that the withdrawal, even if verbal, was effective, in observance of the principle of the freedom of form, since in the case at hand the collective agreement did not mandatorily require a written form in order for the withdrawal to be effective.

 

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 Oct 2026

Corporate e-mail and defensive monitoring: when the GDPR and employment law lead to different outcomes 

The Piaggio case clearly illustrates how the same set of facts can give rise to profoundly different assessments depending on the perspective adopted. In its decision of 13…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI and Reinstatement: the Employee’s Election Causes Loss of the Benefit 

Headnote   In its recent judgment No. 24981 of 3 September 2026, the Italian Supreme Court held that, where a dismissal is set aside with an order of reinstatement…

1 Oct 2026

Did you know that… testimony given in court may have disciplinary relevance and, in the most serious cases, justify dismissal? 

The Italian Supreme Court, Labour Section, by order no. 25687 of 22 September 2026, addressed the issue of the disciplinary relevance of statements made by an employee in…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI in the workplace: how to govern risks, data, and security (Agenda digitale, 29 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Martina De Angeli)

The spread of artificial intelligence tools used without corporate authorization exposes businesses to risks involving personal data, confidential information, know-how, and cybersecurity. To govern Shadow AI, organizations need…

24 Sep 2026

The concept of “territorial scope” in a non-compete agreement (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Alessandro Ferrari)

Interpretative issues in light of the most recent case law on the nullity of non-compete agreements due to the indeterminacy of territorial scope By an order issued on…

16 Sep 2026

Did you know that… repeated violations of company procedures may justify the dismissal of a store manager?

The Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section), in Order No. 25231 of 11 September 2026, upheld the lawfulness of the dismissal for just cause of a store manager who…