The Judicial Conciliation and Unavailable Rights: Analysis of Ordinance No. 8898/2024

The recent Ordinance No. 8898 of April 4, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides important clarifications regarding the topic of judicial conciliation, especially in the context of workers' rights. The ruling addresses whether judicial conciliation can be considered valid even when it concerns unavailable rights, tackling a crucial issue for those operating in the field of labor law.

The Regulatory Context of Judicial Conciliation

Judicial conciliation, governed by Articles 185 and 420 of the Code of Civil Procedure (c.p.c.), cannot be equated to a simple private agreement. It requires the involvement of a judge and adherence to specific formalities, such as those provided by Article 88 of the implementing provisions of the c.p.c. This process not only aims at resolving disputes but also has significant substantive effects, as highlighted in the ruling under discussion.

Judicial conciliation - Constitutive elements - Subject - Unavailable rights of the worker - Admissibility - Reasons. The judicial conciliation provided by Articles 185 and 420 of the c.p.c. is a convention that cannot be assimilated to a simple private law transaction, being structurally characterized by the necessary intervention of the judge and the formalities referred to in Article 88 of the implementing provisions of the c.p.c., and functionally by the procedural effect of closing the case in which it intervenes and the substantive effects deriving from the legal transaction simultaneously stipulated by the parties; it is therefore valid even if it concerns unavailable rights, since Article 2113, last paragraph, of the c.p.c. preserves the conciliations carried out under Articles 185, 410, and 411 of the c.p.c., where the intervention in the function of guarantee of the third party (judicial, administrative, or trade union authority), aimed at overcoming the presumption of conditioning the freedom of expression of the worker's consent, adequately protects his position.

Implications of the Ruling for Workers' Rights

The Court has established that judicial conciliations can be considered valid even when they concern unavailable rights, thanks to the intervention of the judge. This aspect is fundamental as it ensures adequate protection for workers, who might otherwise face pressure in giving their consent. In fact, the role of the judge is to serve as a guarantee, ensuring that the worker's consent is genuinely free and not conditioned.

  • Recognition of the validity of judicial conciliation for unavailable rights.
  • Importance of judicial intervention as a guarantee for the worker.
  • Possibility of effectively and protectively closing the case.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 8898 of 2024 represents an important step in the protection of workers' rights in Italy. It clarifies that judicial conciliation, even when concerning unavailable rights, is valid and protected, provided that there is the necessary intervention of the judge. This ruling not only strengthens the role of justice in labor law but also offers an important tool for resolving disputes effectively and fairly.

Bianucci Law Firm