Ubi ius, ibi remedium

The Supreme Court of Cassation has issued a landmark ruling regarding procedural safeguards protecting employees in disciplinary dismissals. By Order No. 24378 of August 2, 2026, the Court clarified that a dismissal imposed in the complete absence of a prior written disciplinary charge is legally equivalent to the non-existence of the alleged misconduct. Consequently, the employee is entitled to reinstatement in the workplace and full compensation for damages. This decision reinforces fundamental statutory protections for employees, confirming the mandatory nature of the procedural steps set out in the Workers' Statute (Statuto dei Lavoratori).

In its judgment no. 22621 of 2 July 2026, the Supreme Court of Cassation, Labour Division, revisited disciplinary dismissal for a worker's failure to be found at home during a mandatory sickness check. The Court upheld the annulment of the dismissal and set out a principle with clear practical weight: where the medical inspector's report contains ambiguous wording, the employer must prove that the employee was genuinely absent from home. The decision speaks directly to companies, employees and practitioners who manage sickness-absence controls.

The Italian Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione), Labour Section, in judgment no. 16525 of 27 May 2026, delivered on a preliminary reference under Article 363-bis CPC, has established principles on substitute teachers' leave entitlement. The ruling holds that fixed-term teaching staff are entitled to financial compensation only for the difference between accrued leave and lesson suspension days set by regional calendars, during which leave may be taken by operation of law without formal notice from the school principal. The principal's duty to inform remains in effect for the period between the end of lessons and 30 June. An analogous regime applies to rest days under Law no. 937/1977.

In its recent order no. 20005/2026, the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation provides a landmark interpretation of Article 2087 of the Italian Civil Code. The Court affirms that the employer’s duty of care extends beyond formal mobbing to encompass any conduct creating a stressful and health-damaging work environment. This article analyzes the legal implications of this ruling for corporate risk management and the employer's burden of proof in workplace liability claims.

Through Ordinance No. 16300 of May 26, 2026, the Supreme Court of Cassation precisely outlines the boundaries of an employee's duty of loyalty. The Court clarifies that diverting clients while the employment relationship is still active constitutes an independent breach of contract, making it unnecessary for employers to prove elements of unfair competition to claim damages.

The Supreme Court of Cassation, Employment Section, with Ordinance No. 13731 of May 11, 2026, confirmed the validity of employment termination notified via standard email. The ruling clarifies that this method of communication constitutes a lawful dismissal, as it is fully capable of satisfying the written form requirement under Art. 2 of Law 604/1966. For the act to be effective, the employer must solely provide objective proof that the message was received by the recipient. The decision adapts labor law practices to contemporary corporate dynamics, reiterating that digital channels are valid and binding, with significant operational implications for the entire corporate organization.