By a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of Cassation specified that if the parties had not expressly provided for the written form for the termination of a company collective agreement, the employer’s withdrawal may be simply communicated orally, or take place for conclusive facts.

I. Dismissal after the probationary period: it is illegal if training is lacking. The Supreme Court declared on the legality of a dismissal ordered for the failure of the probationary period if the employer did not provide the pertaining training established by the National Collective Labour Agreement.

II. “Guarantee Officer”: the identification of the recipients of the safety requirements in complex corporate structures. According to the Supreme Court the identification of the recipients of the safety requirements imposed by the regulations for the prevention of work accidents in such environments must be based on the actually exercised functions and not on the qualification covered by people in charge.

III. Self-employed women: maternity benefits and time-off for the employee father.

La Corte Costituzionale ha dichiarato illegittimo l’articolo 3, comma 1, del Decreto Legislativo cosiddetto “Jobs Acts” sul contratto

The Constitutional Court ruled unlawful article 3, comma 1 of the so called “Job Acts” Legislative Decree concerning the growing protection given to the employment with regard to the issue that strictly determines the allowance due for unjustified dismissal.

La Corte di Cassazione ha confermato il licenziamento per “voluta negligenza e lentezza nell’esecuzione del lavoro” di un