Travia Legal

Ubi ius, ibi remedium

News

Latest news

February 24 2026

Unsuitable premises and the right to refuse work: legal protections against retaliatory dismissal

The Supreme Court of Cassation, with ordinance no. 3145 of February 12, 2026, has upheld the nullity of a dismissal issued to an employee who refused to work in premises that were unsuitable and hazardous to health. The ruling clarifies that refusing to perform professional duties constitutes a legitimate exercise of the "exception of non-performance" (Art. 1460 c.c.) when the employer breaches their fundamental safety obligations under Art. 2087 of the Civil Code. Regarding the burden of proof, the Court established that while the worker must only allege the existence of a risk, the employer must demonstrate the actual suitability of the work environment. This decision reinforces protections against retaliatory termination by identifying dismissals based on absences provoked by the employer's own failure to provide safe working conditions as null and void.

Read
Licenziamento disciplinare: reintegra per fatti irrilevanti
February 19 2026

Disciplinary dismissal: reinstatement for legally irrelevant conduct

The Court of Modena, with ruling no. 56 of January 9, 2026, addressed the issue of disciplinary dismissal under the "increasing protections" regime (Jobs Act), establishing a pivotal principle for employee protection. The judgment clarifies that reinstatement protection (tutela reintegratoria) applies not only when the alleged misconduct did not historically occur, but also when the contested fact lacks any disciplinary relevance. In this specific case, informal communications with clients, not barred by explicit company directives, were found insufficient to support a dismissal for cause. The judge identified a substantive defect, affirming that the absence of severity and the lack of proportionality between the sanction and the charge lead to the annulment of the dismissal and the restoration of the employment relationship. This decision underscores that the "non-existence of the material fact" must be interpreted in a legal sense, ensuring reinstatement whenever the conduct is harmless or falls outside the disciplinary scope defined by the National Collective Labor Agreement (CCNL).

Read
Mansioni superiori e differenze retributive: la Cassazione ribadisce le regole sull’inquadramento
February 17 2026

Higher Duties and Job Classification: Supreme Court Ruling 1212/2026

The Supreme Court, with Ordinance No. 1212 of January 20, 2026, has reaffirmed the strict methodological requirements for recognizing higher duties and the corresponding salary differentials. The Court clarified that trial judges cannot rely solely on witness testimony but must apply the "three-phase procedure." This process requires a factual assessment of the duties performed, an analysis of the National Collective Labour Agreement (CCNL) classifications, and a precise comparison between the two. The ruling emphasizes that the absence of such a comparative analysis results in a failure to prove the right to a higher job classification, leading to the appeal being upheld in favor of the employer. This principle serves as a key benchmark for managing litigation regarding professional grading and reclassification.

Read
Assegno di divorzio: quando spetta davvero? I chiarimenti della Cassazione sui sacrifici per la famiglia
February 16 2026

Maintenance allowance: Supreme Court ruling on economic imbalance and career sacrifices

In Ordinance No. 2917 of February 9, 2026, the Supreme Court of Cassation overturned a decision that granted divorce alimony based solely on hypothetical projections of future pension imbalances. The Court reaffirmed that alimony requires proof of the applicant's current inadequacy of means and an objective inability to provide for themselves at the time of the claim. Any economic imbalance between former spouses must be an actual factual precondition, stemming from documented professional sacrifices rather than generic presumptions related to informal work or brief career interruptions. This ruling strengthens the burden of proof on the claimant, who must demonstrate the waiver of realistic income opportunities in favor of family needs.

Read
Contratto di agenzia: il patto di non concorrenza è valido anche senza un corrispettivo
February 12 2026

Non-Compete Clauses in agency contracts: valid even without indemnity

The Supreme Court of Cassation, in Order No. 1226 of January 20, 2026, has confirmed the full validity of non-compete clauses in agency contracts, even in the absence of a specific indemnity. According to the Supreme Court, the indemnity provision in Article 1751-bis of the Civil Code is not enforced by a sanction of nullity and is therefore considered derogable by the parties' autonomy. The decision emphasizes that the professional sacrifice required of the agent may be justified by the overall economic balance of the agency relationship rather than a single monetary consideration. This ruling stabilizes judicial orientation in favor of contractual freedom for businesses, while leaving room for reflection on the legal stability of agreements that are excessively burdensome for professionals without compensation.

Read