MILAN 20145
Via Lorenzo Mascheroni, 31
Tel. +39 02 4819 3249
evangelista.basile@ichinobrugnatelli.it
Evangelista has been a Partner in Studio Legale Ichino Brugnatelli e Associati since the end of 2001, soon after completing the European Master in Labour Studies. Earlier that year he was in charge of training the Judges of the Conseils de Prud’hommes in Toulouse with CFDT (Confédération française démocratique du travail). Despite starting his career with a law firm specializing in civil law disputes, his activity now focuses on consultancy and litigation in the field of labour and trade union law mainly, and only to a lesser degree in the field of civil law.
Professional Affiliations: teacher of professional training with AIDP (namely, Associazione Italiana per la Direzione del Personale, i.e. Italian Association of HR Managers), and ANCL (namely, Associazione Nazionale dei Consulenti del Lavoro, i.e. Country-wide Italian Association of Employment Counsels); teacher of post-graduation courses and seminars organized by Euroconference.
Publications: author of many articles in “Rivista italiana di diritto del lavoro”, author of notes and commentaries regularly published by Italian Law Journals specializing in Labour Law such as “La Circolare” and “Il Giurista”.
The Court of Cassation in its judgment no. 27334/2022 states that dismissal is to be considered null and void, where the allowed sickness leave has not elapsed, regardless of the number of employees in the company. If the employer is a small company, however, the so-called attenuated reintegration protection applies, pursuant to Article 18(7) of the Workers' Statute. The commentary by Evangelista Basile and Rosibetti Rubino on this ruling, which overturned the first two degrees of judgement, highlights its importance from a jurisprudential point of view. Our labour lawyers analyse the grounds of the judgment, in particular the normative references that were declared applicable to the case under examination. The Court's orientation is clear from this analysis: whether or not the 15-employee threshold is met cannot legitimise a diversification of the consequences of a null dismissal. According to the Supreme Court, this would be the only interpretation compatible with the need to ensure rationality and harmony to the system of protections in the case of dismissal.