N 1

July 2016

Preface
Italian labour law is experiencing a new era marked by a proliferation of new legislation. The new legislation
aims to adapt rules of work to the demands of the new millennium, to increase the flexibility in the market
into and out of work, and to stimulate foreign investment in Italy. This follows the liberalisation of fixed-term
contracts, significant changes to the rules for the dismissal for those hired after March 7, 2015, as well as the
economic incentives provided for enterprises doing business in Italy in 2016. As a consequence of the many
changes, the firm will provide our customers and foreign partners with timely and accurate updates about
new regulations and case law. We have always provided our national clients with updates through our rich
and widely read newsletter, which has now exceeded over 100 publications. We are aware that the lawyer's
role in assisting companies in the third millennium is not only to perform to the customer guidelines, but also
to stimulate new ideas and create new opportunities for discussion.

A.- LABOUR: New Laws

Recognition of same sex unions in Italy. What employers need to know (and to do).
The Italian Parliament on May 20, 2016 approved the law on civil unions between persons of the same sex (L
n. 76/2016). This law affects the regulations of labour law. The civil union, representing essentially a
"marriage" between persons of the same sex, implies similar rights.
It is a rule of general application, to extend to civil union parties - among others - all the rights and powers
that labour law, collective agreements and union agreements, grant to spouses. Note that the reference is
open, and thus allows the automatic application of any rule of law or collective agreement, existing or future,
in relation to spouses and / or marriage. Consequently, because the reference is open, litigation could arise
- or at least, different interpretations - about the application of individual institutions (consider for example,
the rules of collective agreements that refer to the "head of the household").
Conversely, with regard to the rules of the Civil Code and Law No. 4 May 1983. 184 (law on adoptions and
foster care), Article. 1, paragraph 20, provides that only those expressly referred to without the possibility of
extensive or analogical interpretation.
Since the extension of the rules regarding civil unions, the laws and contracts relating to married couples
guarantee to the parties the ability to fulfil the mutual assistance obligations, moral and material, and its
functional institutions:
accounts of family responsibilities and any related implications for tax and social security aspects, including
family allowances and deductions, as well as in cases of dismissal (Art. 5 of the l. 223/1991, a

 rule that identifies the legal criteria of choices in cases of collective dismissal, but established case-law is
applicable by analogy in the event of multiple individual dismissals for just cause);
permissions, leave and expectations for assistance to ill or disabled partners for compassionate reasons or
mourning (l. February 5, 1992 n. 104 and s. 8 March 2000 n. 53);
any limitations or allowances provided for in collective bargaining in respect of transfers that impact on
workers' families (eg. art. 170 of the tertiary CCNL; art. 111 of the Negotiable Credit);
the right to withdraw consent to the elastic clauses relating to part-time to assist the affected partners
from oncological diseases; priority in the right to transformation of the relationship in part-time in the
same situation in question.

In terms of protection from possible discrimination at work, apply for civil union parties:
The provisions of Article. 35 of Legislative Decree no. 11 April 2006, n.198 (Code of equal opportunities)
on the nullity of the dismissal notice in connection with marriage and the resignation within one year of
marriage;
Forecasts, laws and collective agreements relating to holidays and marriage leave, and those indemnified
by INPS, both those generally provided for in the national labour contract (eg. art. 158 of the tertiary CCNL;
art. 3, Title VI , sect. IV, CCNL metalworkers industry; art. 57 of the Negotiable Credit).

Its evident that employers will be required to adjust their policies and their companys collective agreements
to the new rules.

PRIVACY: THE COUNTDOWN FOR COMPANIES has started

Twenty years after the first European Directive on Privacy (Dir. 95/46 / EC) there has been a change of the
rules in Europe. On May 25, 2016 the new European Regulation 2016/679 came into force, approved on 14
April 2016 by the European Parliament, concerning the protection of personal data. The new package of
regulations, with the role of the regulation (legal act of "self-executing") required in the same way and
simultaneously in all countries of the European Union after publication in the official journal. The discipline
will be effective even extraterritorial as mandatory for any holder who carries a flow of information to those
concerned EU residents.
Businesses and governments have two years (until 25 May 2018) to adapt to the new rules.
In Italy, companies should get to work on the issue before this deadline. The period (two years) is not long.
Businesses must, in fact, start work immediately, taking account of possible new sanctions. The rules provide
a tightening of administrative sanctions provided by private and public companies; in the case of violations
of the principles and provisions of the Regulations, the sanctions in particular cases can reach up to 20
million or 4% of the total annual worldwide turnover of the previous year.

Below is a summary of the main changes.

The Data Protection Officer (DPO).
Public and private companies will be obliged to appoint a DPO - Head of Data Protection. This may be a
competent professional in the field of data protection, employee of the data controller company, or
alternatively, an external collaborator. In any case, the DPO must be in possession of specific requirements,
such as expertise, experience, independence and autonomy of resources.
The register of processing activities.
The owner or manager will have the sealing requirement of a register of the processing activities carried out
in order to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of the Regulations.
The privacy impact assessment.
In certain cases, public and private firms, before proceeding should carry out an impact assessment (privacy
impact assessment).The Privacy Authority will draw up a list of the types of treatment subject to this
requirement.
The right to be forgotten.
Recognised so far only at the level of case law (judgment issued against Google by the European Court of
Justice), now institutionalised regulatory challenges: the addressee can choose to be deleted and have no
further processing of their data by means of withdrawal of consent if the data is no longer needed for the
purpose for which it was collected, or when treatment does not conform to the rules.
Privacy by design, data portability, accountability, privacy breach by date, by default privacy
Citizens have:
- The right to be informed in a transparent and dynamic way on the treatment of the data and the adoption
of privacy policies and appropriate measures in accordance with regulation (accountability- principle of
accountability);
- The right to be informed about violations of their personal data (data breach notification);
- The right to receive in a format of common use, and readable by an automatic device, the personal data
supplied to a data controller and the transmission of such data to another data controller unimpeded (data
portability).
The protection of personal data must be evaluated, before the time of designing and processing (data
protection by design) of new procedures, with the appropriate technical and organisational measures. Data
should only be used for the intended purposes and for the time strictly necessary (privacy by default).

EMPLOYMENT IN ITALY IN 2016 COSTS LESS. CLARIFICATIONS FROM THE MINISTRY OF LABOUR

It is often said that investments in Italy are discouraged by the excessive cost of labour. The new regulations
seek to move in the direction of reducing the tax and contributions on income earned.

One of the most recent legislative changes in this regard was provided for in Article. 1, paragraph 178, of the
2016 Stability Law. It provides, in favour of private employers, for a maximum period of 24 months, the
exemption from the payment of 40% of total social security contributions, to a maximum of the amount of
exemption up to 3,250 euros on an annual basis in the case of new employment contracts with fixed-term
employment contract of indefinite duration entered into during the period from 1st January 2016 to 31
December 2016.
The law also provides that the above is not for the foretold benefit of those workers for whom the
contribution exemption has been enjoyed in relation to the previous permanent employment.
The Ministry has recently stated that it must be held that foreclosure is made only to the previous facilitated
working relationship established with the same employer, including companies controlled by them or
connected to it.
Therefore:
exemption is available where
(1) the employer (or the subsidiary or associate) who (re) assumed in 2016 compared to a worker who has
already enjoyed exemption under Law Stability 2015;
(2) in the sub (1) even if between the termination of the previous report and the new employment (in 2016)
elapses by a period of six months.
the responsibility exemption
(I) in the case of an unemployed worker for at least six months, and in which, the previous and separate
employer, has taken advantage of the exemption contributory 2015;
(Ii) in the case of an unemployed worker for at least six months, and in which, the previous and separate
employer, has taken advantage of the exemption contributory 2016.

Video surveillance: recent legal interpretations/rulings on the storage of recorded images.

The practice of deadlines for storage of images recorded by video surveillance systems has become
increasingly important in the context of the correct legal and technical management of these devices, even
in the face of technological developments that allow more and more detailed shots and needs of companies.
In this context, the Authority for the Protection of Personal Data, since April 2010, issued a special general
ruling on video surveillance (Doc. No web. 1712680) that identifies key requirements facing businesses
including compliance with the provisions of image storage times.
On this last aspect to the general ruling it establishes that the images should be retained for the time strictly
necessary for security reasons and in any event for up to 24 hours of their detection. Only in the case in which
the company carries out particularly hazardous activities its allowed a longer storage time, not longer than
a week and this in order to protect interests deemed worthy of a greater defence, such as security and public
safety. However, there have been several pronouncements of the Guarantor Authority for the Protection of
Personal Data, designed to allow such storage for prolonged periods. In this regard, the latest Guarantor
Authority's determination is that of 7 April 2016 (web doc. No. 5063704), in relation to a preliminary request
4

(pursuant to art. 17 of the Privacy Code) by two companies, operating in the sector of so-called video lottery
namely collecting game activities to means of terminals video equipment. Such companies have made the
request due to the need to safeguard the company's assets from possible illegal actions and assist police in
the investigation aimed at identifying those responsible. The two companies, after declaring that some of
their gambling assets had been involved in criminal activities, pointed out that certain offences (in particular,
a shortfall of money) required complex control activities, to count the money collected. These activities need
to be performed taking into account both the needs of cost management and time required for the
examination of the records and control of hundreds of machines installed.
The authority has considered legitimate demands for the lengthening of storage times up to 15 days. A
request by one of the most important companies operating in the luxury services sector, (a prestigious Italian
brand marketing jewellery, watches, accessories, perfumes and cosmetics through its own boutique)
obtained authorisation for the preservation of the images for a 7-month period (Authority determination of
25 June 2015- Doc. web. 4173504).

B.- LABOUR: THE JUDGMENT OF THE MONTH

Legitimate to dismiss the employee during the period of sick is dedicated to the commercial activity of his/her
spouse. In this case, the employee was absent from work due to injury. The employer imposed a dismissal
for just cause on the assumption that the worker's conduct (supported by extensive photographic
documentation) was incompatible with the existence of the traumatic event and the general obligation to
behave in a manner appropriate to a speedy recovery, and, ultimately, with the obligation to return promptly
to work. The worker appealed the dismissal attaching medical documentation proving the existence of the
trauma and evidence that the activities did not result in any delay in healing and in the subsequent return to
work. Further the activities were in line with the normal course of similar traumas. The medical expert
witness recorded that, considering the working nature of the accident, the healing time had remained the
same as similar cases, but the non-work activity of the employee had placed at risk the promptness of healing
and the potential for promoting the healing process. The judge, invoking the legal principle that the
assessment should be done judiciously ex ante to the injury and the duties performed, has stated the
legitimacy of the dismissal by virtue of the mere risk of aggravation of health conditions or delay in the
recovery of the worker. (Ascoli Piceno Court March 25, 2016)

C.- CIVIL, INSURANCE AND COMMERCIAL LAW. JUDGMENT OF THE MONTH

The receipt signed by the agent alone does not prove payment of the insurance premium.
The receipt of payment, made on a pre-printed form provided by the insurer bearing the autograph and the
machine-agent signing of the insurance company, did not have value to the latter and, therefore, is not in
itself proof of the payment of the premium by the contractor. So ruled the Milan Court of Appeal in its
judgment on the epigraph, confirming the first instance judgment issued by the Court of Lecco. On the point,
the board did not attach any importance to the fact that the payment receipts received were signed with the

agents autograph; In fact, the insurance relationship between the customer and the insurance company and
the agent, acting as intermediary, has no power neither representative nor signatory.
With this ruling, the Appeal Court of Milan upheld a consolidated approach at the Court of Lecco that, in
many cases, had ruled that the insurer would be bound by receipts of payment that reported "printed" (and
therefore not in autograph form) the initials of the company's governing bodies. This orientation is
particularly interesting because it fills a long jurisprudential void".
(Supreme Court, sentence n. 555/1973). (Appeal Court of Milan, April 19, 2016)