Unjustified Dismissal in Firms Over 15 Workers: Reinstatement

Supreme Court Ruling No. 9544/2025 Confirms Reinstatement for Dismissals Without Justification

In companies with more than 15 employees, the complete absence of justification in a dismissal letter is not a mere formal flaw but a substantive defect. This results in the dismissal being unlawful from the outset, triggering the attenuated reinstatement protection outlined in Article 18, paragraph 4 of the Workers’ Statute.

The Case: No Justification in the Dismissal Notice

The case involved an employee hired before March 7, 2015, who was dismissed in 2017 without any justification provided at the time of termination. The Florence Court of Appeal applied only monetary compensation under Article 18, paragraph 6, treating the dismissal as merely ineffective due to a formal defect. However, the Supreme Court overturned this reasoning.

Supreme Court: Not a Formal Error, But a Substantive Violation

The Court referred to Article 2, paragraph 2 of Law 604/1966, which mandates that the reasons for dismissal be clearly stated in the same communication. The purpose is to allow the worker to immediately understand the grounds and prepare a defense. When no reason is given—or it is too vague to identify any factual basis—the worker’s right to defense is nullified, and the court cannot assess the legitimacy of the dismissal.

Reinstatement Prevails Over Monetary Compensation

According to the Court, in such cases, paragraph 6 of Article 18 does not apply, as it addresses minor formal defects. Instead, paragraph 4 must be applied, which grants reinstatement and up to 12 months’ compensation, typically used in cases where the factual basis for dismissal is proven false.

This interpretation prevents legal inconsistencies. Otherwise, an employer could gain an advantage by omitting the reason for dismissal, thus receiving a more favorable sanction than in cases where a false reason is given and disproved later in court.

Constitutional Principles Reinforced

The ruling is consistent with Constitutional Court decisions No. 59/2021, 125/2022, and 128/2024, which emphasize proportionality in employment protections. These decisions criticize weaker sanctions for more serious employer misconduct, such as issuing a dismissal without any factual justification.

Key Legal Principle

The Supreme Court has stated:

“In companies with more than 15 employees, a failure to specify the factual basis of a dismissal is not a formal error, but a substantive defect rendering the dismissal unlawful from the start. This justifies application of the attenuated reinstatement under Article 18(4) of Law 300/1970.”

Final Notes

This landmark ruling further limits the use of monetary-only remedies in unjustified dismissal cases and strengthens reinstatement as the central protection in Italian labor law. The message is clear: dismissals must be well-founded and clearly justified—or employers risk full reinstatement of the employee.