The employee who receives the permission of Law 104/1992 may engage in tasks to be typical assistance to those disabled relative. Any conduct dissimilar negates the relationship of trust, so as to justify dismissal for cause and render rise to criminal liability.
The cases of ‘crafty’, which are otherwise abusing the permissions provided by the Law 104, are becoming more numerous. And even more so are the companies that decide to turn to third parties to certify the abuse. Several judgments of the Supreme Court, in fact, recognized the legal validity of surveys conducted using private investigators.
To create the precedent was certainly the n. 4984/2014, in which stoats have legitimized the defensive controls in respect of an employee who had abused the former Law 104/92 permits.
In that case, the Supreme Court not only considered justified dismissal for cause, but has also entered into the merits of the agency investigating the monitoring, lawful reputandoli and, above all, be used in court.
These controls have been interpreted as the consequence resulting from a reasonable doubt on the part of the employer, then also supported by some statements made by two witnesses.