Dismissal and Discrimination: Analysis of Judgment Cass. civ., Section Labour, no. 36776 of 2022

Judgment no. 36776 of 2022 by the Court of Cassation offers an important reflection on the legitimacy of dismissal and potential discrimination in employment relationships. In this article, we will analyze the key points of the decision, highlighting the applicable regulations and the implications for Italian and European labour law.

Context of the Judgment

In the case under review, A.A. challenged the dismissal received from the bankruptcy trustee of a company, arguing that it was discriminatory and lacked justification. The Court of Appeal of Naples, upholding the trustee's appeal, rejected the applicant's claims, ruling that there was no proof of discrimination or illegality in the dismissal.

The Court ruled out the possibility of the dismissal being discriminatory or retaliatory, rejecting in full the claims made by the applicant.

Principles of Equality and Non-Discrimination

A central element of the judgment is the reference to the principles of equality and non-discrimination, enshrined in Italian and European regulations. Article 24 of the Italian Constitution and Articles 20 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union clearly establish that everyone has the right to be treated without discrimination. However, the Court found that in this specific case, there were insufficient elements to demonstrate discriminatory conduct by the employer.

• The principle of non-discrimination is a fundamental right in the European Union.
• Discrimination is defined as unjustified differential treatment compared to other workers.
• The Court confirmed that the burden of proof lies with the worker alleging discrimination.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment no. 36776 of 2022 by the Court of Cassation offers an important clarification on the boundaries between the legitimacy of dismissal and discrimination. It emphasizes the importance of concrete proof from the worker, highlighting that mere suspicion of discrimination is not sufficient to annul a dismissal. This case remains a reference point for future disputes concerning labour law and fundamental rights.