Commentary on Judgment No. 1534 of 2024: False Certifications and Employee Responsibility

The judgment No. 1534 of November 26, 2024, filed on January 14, 2025, by the Court of Appeal of Lecce, provides an important reflection on the issue of false certifications in the workplace, particularly in relation to Article 55-quinquies of Legislative Decree No. 165 of 2001. This decision fits within a legal context increasingly attentive to the protection of public trust and the responsibility of employees in compliance with current regulations.

The Regulatory Context and the Judgment

The provision referenced by the judgment in question punishes false certifications, establishing a crime of particular gravity due to its impact on trust in employment relationships. In particular, the Court emphasized that "other fraudulent means" should be understood broadly, including any deceptive conduct that could mislead a subject, even if not directly involved in the crime.

Crime of false certifications as per Article 55-quinquies of Legislative Decree No. 165 of 2001 - Objective element - “Other fraudulent means” - Definition - Indication - Case law. In the matter of false certifications, as per Article 55-quinquies of Legislative Decree No. 165 of March 30, 2001, the "other fraudulent means" mentioned in the incriminating norm are constituted by any deceptive activity, qualified or unqualified, capable of putting a subject in a situation of error or simple ignorance, not necessarily coinciding with the passive one. (Case related to the omission of intermediate "clocking" out, where the Court clarified that, with such conduct, impacting the content of the work performance, the employee, falsely appearing to be present at the workplace, conceals from the public employer the arbitrary departure from service).

The Implications of the Judgment

The Court clarified that the conduct of the employee, consisting of the omission of intermediate clocking, was deemed serious enough to constitute fraudulent behavior. This is particularly relevant in a work context, where physical presence and adherence to working hours are essential to ensure the regularity of work performance. The absence of proper clocking not only misleads the employer but also undermines mutual trust, which is fundamental in the employment relationship.

  • The employee must be aware of the legal consequences of their actions.
  • The employer has the right to know the truth about the presence of their employees.
  • Trust is a crucial element in every working relationship.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 1534 of 2024 highlights the importance of transparency and fairness in employment relationships. The Court of Appeal of Lecce, through this decision, not only reiterates the principle that any deceptive conduct is punishable but also emphasizes the need for greater awareness among workers regarding their responsibilities. It is therefore essential that both employers and employees understand the seriousness of false certifications and their impact not only on the individual employment relationship but on the entire trust system that regulates the labor market.

Bianucci Law Firm