Carlo Pisani
Full Professor, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”
in Il Lavoro nella giurisprudenza, No. 10/2025
The article examines the contents and implications of Constitutional Court judgment No. 118/2025, which raised to eighteen months’ salary the cap on compensation for unjustified dismissal applicable to employers with up to fifteen employees. The analysis highlights the contrast with the Court’s earlier “historic” precedents and suggests the “derivative” unconstitutionality of the six-month ceiling set forth in Article 8 of Law No. 604/1966. It discusses the principles established by Constitutional Court judgment No. 194/2018—now extended to small enterprises by judgment No. 118/2025—and the broad balancing discretion conferred upon judges, constrained by the requirement to allege and prove the facts that may justify increasing compensation beyond the minimum threshold. The article also points out the uncertainties and inconsistencies in the criteria for determining compensation and proposes possible practical solutions to avoid the disruptive impact of the judgment on genuinely small employers.
1. The end of a small era: the six-month cap is abolished, but the sole criterion of employee headcount remains; 2. The contrast with the Constitutional Court’s “historic” precedents; 3. The principle established by Constitutional Court judgment No. 194/2018, also applied to small enterprises by judgment No. 118/2025; 4. A very broad balancing discretion granted to the judge, within the limits of alleging and proving the facts capable of justifying compensation above the minimum; 5. The uncertainties and contradictions in the criteria for determining compensation; 6. Possible practical solutions to prevent the disruptive impact of the judgment on genuinely small employers; 7. The “derivative” unconstitutionality of the six-month cap under Article 8 of Law No. 604/1966; 8. A postscript on the possible (ir)relevance of the issue in the judicium a quo (the referring proceedings).