An employment lawsuit in Milan does not have a uniform duration for everyone: the type of claim, the number of necessary evidence, the possibility of a settlement and any appeal against the judgment all matter. I fully understand why this question arises immediately: anyone waiting for salaries, salary differences, the recognition of an employment relationship or a response after a dismissal needs to understand not only whether they can take legal action, but also when they can obtain a useful result.

In this guide I explain what the terms of the labor procedure actually indicate, why they do not coincide with the overall duration of the lawsuit and which steps have the greatest impact on the schedule before the Court of Milan. We will also look at the difference between a claim that primarily requires documents and a dispute that requires witnesses, expert opinions or multiple levels of proceedings.

Duration does not coincide with the terms written in the code

The labor procedure is designed to concentrate procedural activities, but the terms provided by law do not constitute a promise regarding the date of the final judgment. The code establishes a rapid schedule for filing the application and for the first hearing; the actual duration then depends on the complexity of the lawsuit and the specific scheduling of hearings by the competent judicial office.

For this reason, it is not correct to answer the question "how long does it take?" with a fixed number of months or years. A claim for documented wage credits may follow a very different path from a lawsuit in which the dispute concerns whether the relationship was subordinate, whether a dismissal was lawful or what loss has been proven. The contested subject matter changes the number of steps required, and not just the economic value of the claim.

Milan does not apply a separate labor procedure compared to the rest of Italy. The procedural rules are national; what may affect the concrete timing is the schedule of the assigned judge, together with the needs of the individual dispute. It is therefore always advisable to distinguish three moments: the time to reach the first hearing, the time to admit evidence and the time required if a party files an appeal.

From the application to the first hearing: what the labor procedure provides

The lawsuit begins with an application, not with a writ of summons. The application must indicate the judge, the parties, what is being requested, the facts on which the claim is based and the available evidence, with particular attention to the documents produced. This structure is important because in labor proceedings allegations and evidentiary requests must be formulated precisely already in the initial acts.

Article 415 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure provides that the judge shall set the discussion hearing within five days of filing the application and that no more than sixty days shall pass between filing and the hearing. It also provides minimum times for notification to the defendant and for their defense. These are terms of the introductory phase: they serve to organize the cross-examination, meaning to allow both parties to know the claim, defenses and evidence. You can read the text of the articles on the regulatory reference on the labor procedure.

The first hearing does not automatically close the lawsuit. At that hearing the judge freely questions the parties present, attempts conciliation and may formulate a settlement or conciliation proposal. If the dispute can already be defined on the basis of the acts and documents, the path can be more straightforward. If, on the other hand, it is necessary to hear persons informed about the facts, acquire further elements or order a technical expert opinion, additional activities are required.

The code aims to avoid unnecessary adjournments and provides that the taking of evidence shall be completed at the same hearing or, when necessary, on the immediately following business days. This rule favors concentration, but does not eliminate the time required by numerous pieces of evidence, controversial issues or impediments that make it necessary to set new dates. The regulatory provision does not turn a complex lawsuit into a short one.

The circumstances that change the lawsuit schedule

Evidence is the first factor affecting duration. If pay slips, the contract, attendance records, company communications and calculations allow the credit to be reconstructed without significant disputes, the judge can focus on their meaning. If instead the parties give opposing versions regarding working hours, job duties, orders received, the reason for dismissal or the independent or subordinate nature of the relationship, it may become necessary to hear witnesses.

A testimony is not meant to repeat generic assessments such as "they worked hard" or "they were treated unfairly." It must concern specific facts: an observed work schedule, a directive received, a concrete method of performing the service. The quality of the alleged facts affects the proceedings, because evidence formulated in a generic way may not be admitted and relevant evidence may require multiple hearings.

A second element is the plurality of claims. An employee may ask, for example, for wage differences, overtime pay, unused holidays and compensation linked to a dismissal. Not all of these issues necessarily require the same assessment. When the judge must first define the nature of the relationship and then quantify the economic consequences, the decision requires connected steps that a single, documentary claim does not entail.

The joinder of a third party, a counterclaim by the employer or the need for a technical expert opinion also have an impact. Expert opinion is not an automatic step: it is useful when technical knowledge, for example medical or accounting knowledge, is required, which the judge cannot replace with their own assessment. If the issue is purely legal or the calculations are already verifiable from the documents, the expert opinion may not be necessary.

Dismissal and reinstatement: when the lawsuit has priority

Not all dismissal lawsuits have a priority track. Article 441-bis of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure assigns priority status to dismissal challenge disputes in which a claim for reinstatement in the workplace is brought. Priority also applies if the judge must first establish the qualification of the relationship.

In these disputes the judge may reserve specific hearing days, even close together, and may reduce the procedural terms by up to half, while respecting the minimum term provided for the opposing party's defense. Priority is not a guaranteed closer judgment: it depends on the claim brought and the circumstances set forth in the application, while leaving the right of defense of both parties intact. The text of the article can be consulted in Legislative Decree no. 149 of 2022.

The practical difference is significant. If an economic indemnity is exclusively requested, it cannot be presumed that the priority provided for the reinstatement claim applies. If instead reinstatement is requested, it is still necessary to evaluate whether the alleged facts and the legal regime applicable to the relationship make that claim consistent with the case. Speed also depends on what is actually requested, not solely on the fact that the relationship has ended.

Conciliation, judgment and appeal: three different times

An agreement can close the dispute before judgment, but it must not be confused with a generic adjournment of the decision. Conciliation can be attempted either before the lawsuit or during the first hearing. The attempt before the conciliation commission is a possibility provided for labor disputes, not a mandatory step for every claim.

The conciliation request provided for by Article 410 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure interrupts the statute of limitations and suspends forfeiture periods for the duration of the attempt and for the twenty days following its conclusion. If the opposing party accepts the procedure, the law indicates times for filing the brief and for the convocation. Conciliation is useful only if the agreement is concrete: it must clarify which claims are settled, which sums or obligations remain in dispute and what effect mutual waivers produce. The regulatory framework is reported in Article 31 of Law no. 183 of 2010.

The first-instance judgment does not always coincide with the end of the dispute. If a party challenges the decision, the appeal proceedings open; subsequently, within the limits provided by law, there may also be an appeal to the Court of Cassation. When you ask for a duration forecast, it is therefore essential to clarify whether you want to know the time to reach the first decision or the time necessary for the dispute to close definitively.

The choice between settlement and judgment does not depend solely on haste. An agreement can avoid the uncertainty of evidence and subsequent levels of proceedings; a lawsuit may remain necessary when the parties are far apart on decisive facts or on the very recognition of the right. Comparing alternatives means looking at the effects, rather than automatically choosing the shortest path in the abstract.

How to set a realistic expectation before taking action

The first useful question is what result you need. If the problem concerns sums that can already be quantified, the central point is to understand which documents prove the credit and what objections are foreseeable. If it concerns a dismissal, it is necessary to distinguish the economic claim from the reinstatement claim and identify the facts supporting one or the other protection.

Before starting, it is useful to gather the contract, employment or termination letters, pay slips, attendance records, relevant communications and any document that clarifies the job duties or the sums requested. Documents do not always replace witnesses, but they can reduce the issues to be proven and make the content of the claim clearer from the beginning.

Above all, avoid two opposite errors: expecting a certain solution within a preset timeframe or giving up asserting a right just because a lawsuit may take time. Duration must be read together with the nature of the claim, the available evidence and the possibility of an agreed resolution. If you want to examine these elements with respect to your situation, you can contact me.

Frequently asked questions

Is the first hearing always held within sixty days of the application?

Article 415 indicates a maximum term of sixty days between filing the application and the discussion hearing. This is a directory procedural time limit: exceeding it does not extinguish the claim, and in practice the hearing may be scheduled later. It therefore does not guarantee the actual hearing date or predict when judgment will be delivered. The overall duration depends on the necessary evidence, the hearings to be set and any appeal against the decision.

Does a lawsuit for salary differences take less time than a dismissal lawsuit?

It can take less time, but it is not automatic. A wage claim based on documents and little contested calculations can be more straightforward. A dismissal lawsuit may instead have priority when it includes a reinstatement claim. In both cases, the time increases if witnesses must be heard or complex factual issues must be resolved.

Can I attempt conciliation before filing the application?

Yes, the conciliation attempt is possible for disputes relating to employment relationships. The conciliation request can also affect the statute of limitations and forfeiture periods within the terms provided by Article 410 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure. However, it does not replace a verification of the right to be asserted and the concrete content of any agreement.

Does priority for dismissal apply to every claim for compensation?

No, priority has a specific prerequisite. Article 441-bis concerns the challenge of dismissal when a claim for reinstatement in the workplace is brought. A solely economic request does not allow, by itself, to presume the application of the same priority track.

If I obtain a first-instance judgment, is the lawsuit finished?

The first-instance judgment closes that level of judgment, but a party may appeal in the cases and terms established by law. To estimate the timing, it is therefore necessary to distinguish the moment of the first decision from the final settlement of the dispute. This difference is also important when evaluating an agreement.

Useful regulatory references

To delve deeper into the recalled rules, you can consult the text of Articles 414, 415, 416 and 420 of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, the discipline on dismissal disputes with a reinstatement claim and the rules on conciliation in employment disputes.