Public Law Bodies and Employees: The Court of Cassation, with Judgment No. 16926 of 2025, Clarifies the Limits of Equivalence to the Public Administration
The Court of Cassation, with Judgment No. 16926 of June 24, 2025, has provided essential clarification on the rules applicable to the employment relationships of public law bodies (PLBs). The decision, with rapporteur C. S. and president L. T., demarcates the boundaries between public and private law, a crucial issue for entities and employees. But when does a PLB act as a Public Administration, and when does private law prevail?
Public Law Bodies and Labor Law
PLBs are entities assimilated to the Public Administration for specific purposes, mainly in public procurement. The case examined (D. v. C.), confirming the Court of Appeal of L'Aquila, concerned COTIR - Consortium for the dissemination and experimentation of irrigation techniques s.c.a.r.l. in liquidation. The question was whether employees were subject to the Consolidated Act on Public Employment (Legislative Decree No. 165/2001) or to private law provisions in case of redundancy.
The Supreme Court's Ruling: A Clear Distinction
The Supreme Court has crystallized its stance in the following ruling:
The equivalence of a public law body to public administrations concerns segments of activity strictly linked to the awarding of contracts, while the possibility of resorting to private law instruments for achieving the institutional objectives for which the entity is responsible remains, so that the employment relationship with the staff – particularly, concerning its termination following the dissolution of the company – is not subject to the rules of the Consolidated Act on Public Employment but to private law provisions. (In this case, the Supreme Court confirmed the lower court's judgment which had deemed a redundancy declaration pursuant to art. 4, law no. 223 of 1991, to be legitimately addressed to the workers employed by COTIR - Consortium for the dissemination and experimentation of irrigation techniques s.c.a.r.l. in liquidation -, excluding the public entity nature of the aforementioned body and, consequently, the applicability to its employees of both the National Collective Bargaining Agreement for Local Authorities and Legislative Decree No. 165 of 2001).
Judgment No. 16926 of 2025 establishes that the equivalence of PLBs to the Public Administration is functional and limited to contract awarding. For employment relationships, and particularly for their termination (e.g., redundancies), private law provisions (Law No. 223 of 1991) prevail, excluding the Consolidated Act on Public Employment (Legislative Decree No. 165/2001) and the typical National Collective Bargaining Agreements for Local Authorities. The COTIR case is an example of this.
Consequences for Workers and Bodies
This ruling has concrete effects:
- For workers: Employment relationships with PLBs may be governed by private law (e.g., Law No. 223/1991).
- For bodies: The possibility of managing personnel with private law instruments is confirmed, while still observing public law for procurement.
This orientation is consolidated by precedents such as the United Sections Judgment No. 8673 of 2019.
Conclusions
Judgment No. 16926 of 2025 by the Court of Cassation offers a clear legal framework: the equivalence of public law bodies to the Public Administration is specific to procurement, while private law applies to personnel management. This distinction is fundamental for legal certainty, providing clarity to employees and entities.
