In its ruling no. 2058 of January 29, 2025, the Italian Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of a just cause dismissal for an employee who had publicly defamed her superiors via social media.
This case concerns an employee who was dismissed for just cause after posting defamatory statements on Facebook and sending a series of e-mails containing derogatory remarks about her superiors and the company.
Following the appeal, where the employee argued that her statements were simply an exercise of her freedom of speech and had not caused any real damage to the company’s reputation, both the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal. They concluded that the employee’s behavior had irreparably damaged the trust necessary for the employer-employee relationship.
The Court of Appeal specifically found that the employee’s actions «went beyond the formal boundaries of the right to criticize» thus justifying the dismissal for just cause.
Additionally, when evaluating the legitimacy of the dismissal, the Court of Appeal stated that «the e-mails sent from the company’s account and the posts on Facebook, marked by bitterness and acrimony and filled with vulgar and offensive language, clearly showed an intent to personally and professionally offend and humiliate her superiors, undermining any legitimate claim of protecting the company’s interests». The Second – Instance Court further highlighted that the employee’s conduct was not an expression of her right to criticize, but rather an attempt to harm the company’s reputation by mocking its leadership and suggesting unfounded corruption allegations.
The employee challenged the Court of Appeal’s decision by appealing to the Italian Supreme Court, raising several grounds for the appeal.
The Italian Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal, ruling that defamatory conduct on social media can indeed constitute just cause for dismissal, as it undermines the trust relationship between the employee and employer. The Court affirmed that the «expressions made by the employee went beyond the limits of acceptable criticism, making the defense of free speech inapplicable», and also stated that «whether the posts concerned the company itself is irrelevant, as they targeted the hierarchical superiors and clearly had disciplinary significance, especially when, as in this case, they exceeded the limits of formal propriety».
Finally, the Supreme Court emphasized that violations of the duties of loyalty and fairness – particularly when expressed publicly and on social media – can lead to a breakdown in the trust relationship, thus justifying the dismissal.
Other related insights:
With ruling no. 2618 of February 4, 2025, the Italian Supreme Court upheld the legitimacy of the dismissal for just cause of an employee who, while on parental leave, engaged in parallel employment, thus abusing this right.
In the case in exam, during his parental leave, the employee had started a car-buying and selling businesswithout giving prior notice to the employer. The activity was uncovered following an investigation carried out by a private agency commissioned by the employer. According to the investigation, it emerged that the parallel employment was neither occasional nor episodic, thus conflicting with the purposes of paid parental leave. As the Supreme Court stated, these purposes «require that during its enjoyment, the time and energy of the working father be dedicated, even through his presence, to fulfilling the emotional needs of the child».
This conduct, constituting an abuse of parental leave, therefore justified the employee’s dismissal. The Supreme Court stated: «where it is established that the parental leave is used by the father to engage in a different work activity, it constitutes an abuse of the right for diversion from the function of the right, which can be assessed by the judge to determine the existence of a just cause for dismissal. It is not relevant that the performance of such activity contributes to a better organization of the family».
Therefore, the Court reaffirmed that parental leave, while being a right of the working parent, cannot be used for purposes unrelated to those for which it was established.
In conclusion, the abuse of parental leave justifies a dismissal, as it constitutes not only a serious violation of the employee’s duty of loyalty but also a behavior with clear social disvalue, in light of the social and economic costs involved.
Other related insights:
On 20 February 2025 Vittorio De Luca took part in the fifth edition of the Welfare & HR Summit of Il Sole 24 Ore, analysing the main labour law aspects related to the discipline of contracting and the novelties introduced, most recently, by the ‘Corrective Decree’.
Here is the link to see an extract of his speech.
The appointment for the 5th Welfare & HR Summit of Il Sole 24 Ore is on Thursday 20 February from 3 p.m. onwards. The event will see the participation of Vittorio De Luca among the experts convened to take stock of the new paradigms for companies, between new regulations and social changes.
Vittorio De Luca will analyse the main labour law aspects related to the discipline of contracting and the innovations introduced, most recently, by the ‘Corrective Decree’, which, in line with the most recent regulatory, administrative and jurisprudential interventions, aims to make the contracting system more transparent, with the ultimate goal of protecting workers employed in outsourcing. An approach that will also have a considerable impact on companies that use third-party suppliers, which are obliged to adapt quickly.
Click here for further details and to register for the event.
Italian Law 104/1992 grants employees paid leave to assist family members with disabilities, with the cost covered by INPS (the National Institute for Social Security). However, misuse of this benefit has led to judicial investigations to identify potential violations of the law. Case law has helped clarify what constitutes abuse.
The law grants leave for caregiving but does not clearly define the conditions under which its use becomes abusive. In general, courts have adopted a broad interpretation, stating that caregiving includes all tasks a disabled person cannot perform independently, not just personal assistance at home.
In a recent ruling (October 10, 2024, no. 26417), the Italian Supreme Court clarified that caregiving does not require constant presence at the family member’s home, but can include errands, as long as they are aimed at the disabled person’s well-being. The Court also confirmed that using leave outside working hours does not count as abuse, since the leave is granted on a daily, not hourly, basis.
In another ruling (September 9, 2024, no. 24130), the Court stated that personal activities, as long as they do not interfere with caregiving, are not considered abusive. However, if the employee engages in activities far from caregiving, such as going to the beach instead of assisting a family member (Cass. Civ., Labor Section, June 16, 2021, no. 17102), it is considered misuse, and the employer can take disciplinary action, including dismissal for just cause.
Employers can hire investigative agencies to check for abuse, but these investigations must be conducted within legal boundaries, respecting the employee’s privacy.
Continue reading the full version published in Il Sole 24 Ore.
