Supreme Court No. 3791/2024: Employer Liability and Burden of Proof in Mobbing Cases
The Supreme Court, with order No. 3791 dated February 12, 2024, addressed a case of mobbing, establishing important principles regarding employer liability and the burden of proof. The case involved a worker seeking compensation for economic and non-economic damages suffered due to harassing behaviors by the Ministry of Education, Universities and Research (MIUR).
The Case and the Decision of the Court of Appeal
At first instance, the Tribunal of Fermo had rejected the claimant's request, a decision subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal of Ancona. The latter denied the existence of mobbing, deeming the evidence of systematic persecutory behaviors and harassing intent insufficient.
The established absence of mobbing does not diminish the necessity to evaluate and ascertain the potential liability of the employer.
However, the Court of Appeal did not adequately consider the relationship between working conditions and the damage to the worker's health, limiting itself to confirming the absence of mobbing without further analyzing the employer's liability.
Principles of Liability and Burden of Proof
The Supreme Court accepted the grounds for the appeal, emphasizing that Article 2087 of the Civil Code requires the employer to adopt appropriate measures to safeguard the health and integrity of workers. Even in the absence of mobbing, the employer can be held liable if they did not prevent a stressful work environment.
- The employer must demonstrate that they have implemented adequate preventive measures.
- The worker must prove the existence of damage and the causal link to the work environment.
- The distinction between mobbing and straining does not alter the employer's liability.
In conclusion, the order establishes that, in the case of an established lack of mobbing, the judge must nonetheless verify the employer's liability for any omissions in implementing preventive measures.
Conclusions
The ruling No. 3791/2024 of the Supreme Court represents an important step forward in the protection of workers. It clarifies that, even in the absence of mobbing, the employer is required to ensure a healthy and stress-free work environment. This decision places a strong emphasis on the proactive responsibility of the employer and the need to prevent potential harm to workers' health, confirming the complexity of the matter and the importance of proper application of existing regulations.
