Dismissal of executive (dirigente) and deadline to appeal under Law no. 183\/2010, par. 32<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Case ref: Cassazione Civile, sez. lav., 8 gennaio 2020, n. 148<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Through the recent court ruling no. 148 dated January 8th, 2020, the Supreme Court of Cassation once again is called to rule on an issue that has already been widely debated in the past, such as the applicability of the deadline for appealing the dismissal provided by Law no. 183\/2010, par. 32 \u201cto the dismissal of the executive when it is not disputed the validity of the act, instead the dismissal is claimed as being merely unjustified\u201c. Licenziamento del dirigente e termine decadenziale ex art. 32 della legge n. 183\/2010 Cassazione Civile, sez. lav., 8 gennaio 2020, n. 148 Con la recentissima sentenza n. 148 dell\u20198 gennaio 2020 la Corte di Cassazione torna a pronunciarsi su un tema gi\u00e0 in passato ampiamente dibattuto come quello dell\u2019applicabilit\u00e0 del termine decadenziale per l\u2019impugnazione del licenziamento previsto […]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1891,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[44],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n
On this point, the above-mentioned Court ruling states that the application of the rules provided by Law no. 183\/2010, par. 32 beyond the cases of invalidity of the dismissal would represent \u201can inadmissible analogical application of an exceptional rule, which, as providing a legal procedure deadline, must be construed within the strict regulatory framework\u201c.
In other words, in view of the principle of strict interpretation of the rules on legal procedure deadline, it is not possible to extend the \u2018objective\u2019 scope of such a rule to include every \u2018pathology\u2019 of the dismissal, even in view of the special nature of the laws relating to the appeal against dismissals compared with the principles of ordinary law.
Thus, the Supreme Court concludes remarking that the concept of invalidity cannot include the hypothesis of contractual \u2018non-justification\u2019 providing the supplementary indemnity as the only sanction. Indeed, according to the Supreme Court, the supplementary indemnity \u201cis linked to a dismissal which is unquestionably valid and effective, as terminates the employment relationship\u201c.
Therefore, through the above-mentioned Court ruling the Supreme Court states the inapplicability of the deadline to appeal the dismissal provided for by Law no.
183\/2010, par. 32, when the executive only claims the non-justification of the dismissal within the terms of the National Collective Labour Agreement and claims the payment of the supplementary indemnity
<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"