The Italian Civil Code provides for succession and inheritance, each of which require equal treatment of male and female children, including adopted children (Book II, Title I art. 56). In cases in which the conduct of a spouse or co-habitant causes serious physical or mental harm to the other spouse or co-habitant, but the conduct does not constitute a criminal act, the court may issue a family order of protection.
The Commission brought an action against the Italian Republic that they failed to properly implement legislation adopting Directive 76/207. The Commission argued that the Italian government did not properly implement certain requirements, such as equal working conditions, into national law. The Court noted that Article 189 of the EEC Treaty permits a country to implement its own form of legislation. There is no infringement of Directive 76/207 if the national law lets anyone bring the matters covered under the Directive before the courts. Thus, the Court found for the Italian Republic.
The Italian Constitution provides for equality before the law without consideration of sex, race, religion, political affiliation, language, and personal and social conditions (art. 3). It also recognizes the moral and legal equality of spouses (art. 29). Finally, Iit mandates equal employment opportunity for men and women (art.
This legislative decree protects maternity and paternity, and prohibits discrimination on the basis of either. It regulates parental leave, leave for the illness of a child, rest, and the treatment of pregnant workers to protect their health. (Note: PDF is the consolidated text only. Follow the external link for the entire text of the decree.)
An employer fired a woman after learning of her intention to start an assisted reproduction process. The local court and the court of appeal stated that such dismissal was substantially due to gender discrimination against the employee who wanted to start the assisted reproduction process. Such decisions were challenged by the employer who argued that the dismissal of the employee was not connected to any gender discrimination but rather to the absences for illness that would have affected the efficient management of the work.
The Court of Appeal of Turin upheld the lower court’s judgment deeming a clause of a collective agreement negotiated at the enterprise level to be discriminatory because it infringed on Articles 3 and 37 of the Constitution, Article 25, para 2bis, of Decree No. 198/2006 and Article 3 of Decree No. 151/2001.
