Even in instances where an employee is being hired temporarily, an employer in Italy is legally obligated to notify the provincial employment centre before the employee begins work. In addition to this, they are also required to let the employment centre know if they decide to make any changes to an employee’s contract. Law firms like Giambrone Law are frequently hired by employers to draw up contracts, so as to make sure that all potential problems are addressed, and that they are protected against being held liable. Every employer in Italy must also put aside seven percent of the gross salary earned by their employees for the TFR – this is a termination payment, which all employees are entitled to, regardless of whether they leave their position voluntarily or as a result of being dismissed.

A typical Italian employment contract will usually specify employee benefits, including things such as bonuses at the end of the year. The amount provided in these bonuses is discretionary; however most employers will offer a month’s salary. Whilst for the time, these bonuses are still quite commonplace it’s worth noting that many new organisations in Italy are offering company shares instead of bonuses.

Contracts will almost always include details regarding the termination of employment; in this regard, Italian employers are considered to be quite generous, as notice periods are relatively short, ranging from between five to fourteen days for most jobs, and between one and four months for those in managerial and executive positions, or those who have been working in a particular role for several years. If an employee fails to give the required amount of notice, then the employer may decide to sue them. Solicitors from Giambrone Law often deal with such cases.

The post An introduction to Italian employment rights and contracts | Gabriele Giambrone appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.

Two years on however the case against Knox and Sollecito has been opened once more. On March 26^th the Court of Cassation, Italy’s highest court, ruled that the case should be re-opened to finally establish the truth. Although the court of Cassation does not have the remit to base their decision on the presumed guilt or innocence of the defendants, their ruling is however based on whether their earlier appeal had been properly conducted.

For Knox, who returned to her native America after her release in 2011, the news has been devastating. She has described hearing the news as “painful” and the court ruling as “unfounded and unfair.” Knox went on to say that she and her family will “face this continuing battle as we always have, confident in the truth and with our heads held high in the face of wrongful accusations and unreasonable adversity.”

Raffaele Sollecity, Knox’s former Italian partner and co-defendant, has been equally as unsettled by the news especially as, according to his lawyer, it came out on the 29 year olds birthday.

Although Sollecity is an Italian resident, there remains what could potentially become a major issue in the extradition of Amanda Knox. In the case of the Italian court finding it necessary to call or even charge Knox, they will have no legal power to compel her to return.

If Amanda Knox refuses to cooperate what could follow is a complex extradition process. Grazino Cecchetti, a lawyer with the law firm Giambrone Law, believed that “America will not allow extradition … or at least I would say it’s not going to be easy for Italy to obtain.” She continued to point out that even if Knox did end up being sentenced again, she can always re-appeal.

Giambrone Law are a Europe wide law firm lead by Gabriele Giambrone with expertise dealing in law across Europe.

The post Italy Facing Extradition Battle as Knox’s Involvement in Kercher Murder is Re-Examined | Giambrone Law appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.

“It is clear that red-tape and inflexible labour laws have been one of the main reasons why the Italian economy has been so poor at attracting inwards investment and generated such weak economic growth over the past decade.”

“Although the reform process under the Monti government was slow, it was progress all the same. A Bersani government would not only mean a dragging of heels in terms of reforms but an actual reversal of key employment reforms that have been achieved.”

Gabriele Giambrone gives the example of reforms to “Article 18” that Bersani has strongly hinted that he would scrap.

Explains Gabriele Giambrone: “Reforms to Article 18 allowed employers to more easily make redundancies for economic reasons. That is a fairly basic right for employers in most countries but now that is under threat in Italy.”

“Scrapping those reforms to Article 18 would be a huge step backwards.”

Threat to deregulation of law firms

Gabriele Giambrone also says that there will be worries that the legal sector, also much in need of reform, will not see progress under Bersani.

Reformers had hopes that reforms to the corporate structure of law firms would allow more consolidation of law firms and easier entry of foreign law firms to the Italian market – both of which would encourage Italian law firm to offer a more cost effective and customer-focused service.

Adds Gabriele Giambrone: “A more left-leaning, or populist government, is likely to see the hobbling of dozens of such business and economic reforms.”

The post appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.

Giambrone Law has a dedicated Real Estate Department and Gabriele Giambrone, Managing Partner and the person responsible for establishing the firm in 2005, is a respected authority in the field of International Property Law.  Indeed Gabriele Giambrone regularly contributes articles and guidelines on real estate law to some of the leading and most authoritative publications on real estate in the United Kingdom.

Giambrone Law has a team of experienced multi-lingual lawyers and offices and associated law firms all over the world.  Giambrone Law’s main offices are based in London, New York, Tunis, Milan, Rome and Palermo and associate lawyers are based in Spain, France, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Cyprus, Portugal, the United Kingdom, Israel, China, Australia, Chile and Brazil.

Giambrone Law lawyers are experienced in such a diverse range of jurisdictions. Property transactions throughout the world can be dealt with efficiently and communications made clearly without confusing jargon and in the client’s own language.  When it comes to buying and selling property, things can be confusing enough without the added complication of trying to cope with a foreign language.

Giambrone Law is one of the leading firms in Italian Real Estate and Property Sales/Acquisitions and over the last three years have assisted over 2000 foreign buyers to buy new property in Italy and are often able to offer a fixed fee package covering the entire conveyancing process.  Giambrone Law’s Real Estate Department, however, is not limited to just Italy and the team of international property lawyers have helped buyers to acquire property throughout the world.

As well as helping clients to acquire properties in Italy and beyond, Giambrone Law also help foreign clients who are buying or selling property in England and Wales.

The post Giambrone Law – Property Abroad appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has declared Article 3(2bis) of Decree-Law N° 40/2010 (GURI No 71, 26 March 2010) to not contravene Art. 4(3) TEU which compels all Member states to take any appropriate measure to ensure the fulfilment of obligations of EU treaties and/or Acts. The obligation in question is one which relates to ensuring the collection of VAT in conformity with Arts. 2 and 22 of the EU VAT directive – Sixth Directive 1977/388/EEC (the Sixth Directive).

Preliminary Case Facts

An Italian construction company, Belvedere Costruzioni, in its annual VAT return for 1982, deducted a tax credit from 1981. The Ufficio IVA di Piacenza declared the deduction to be invalid and accordingly, sent an adjustment note back to the company.

Belvedere Costruzioni commenced proceedings against the Ufficio IVA at the Tax Court of First Instance, Piacenza; contesting the VAT amount in dispute which was €11,500 (22,264,000 ITL). The Court ruled in favour of the construction company in October 1986. The Ufficio IVA appealed the ruling but failed to secure a victory, when the judgement was subsequently confirmed at the Tax Court of Second Instance in 1990.

The Ufficio IVA proceeded to file their second appeal against the decisions to the Commissione Tributaria Centrale, Bologna (CTCB). According to the Italian law above (Art. 3 (2 bis) Decree-Law No. 40/2010) the Court was bound to automatically conclude the appeal, therefore making the decision of the court of second instance final and binding. The CTCB, considering that this action may violate EU law, decided to stay the proceedings in order to obtain a preliminary ruling from the ECJ in order to clarify whether the Italian law violated EU law, specifically Art. 4(3) TEU and Arts. 2 and 22 of the Sixth Directive.  

Note: Although the Commissione Tributaria Centrale was abolished in 1993, it continued to hear any cases which were before it before this date.

The Law in Question

Art. 3 (2 bis) Decree-Law No. 40/2010 states that in order to ensure that judicial proceedings in tax matters are kept within a reasonable time as per the reasonable time requirement in Art. 6(1) ECHR, any pending tax disputes which arise from actions lodged at first instance more than 10 years before the date of entry into force of this Decree, in which the State Tax Authority has been unsuccessful at both first and second instance, shall be concluded in accordance with set rules. Under (a), it follows that any disputes pending before the Commissione Tributaria Centrale, except relating to reimbursement, shall be concluded automatically.

The above law entered into force on 26 May 2010, meaning that any disputes lodged at first instance before 26 May 2000, and fit the circumstances set above, were concluded automatically without being tried at third instance, therefore extinguishing the debt claimed by the authorities.

Art. 2 of the Sixth Directive says that the supply of goods or services effected for consideration within the territory of the country by a taxable person acting as such and the importation of goods are to be subjected to VAT.

Meanwhile, the relevant parts of Art. 22 of the Sixth Directive states that;

• Every taxable person shall submit a return with an interval to be determined by each Member State.
• Every taxable person shall pay the net amount of the (VAT) when submitting the return. The Member States may, however, fix a different date for the payment of the amount or may demand an interim payment.
• … Member States may impose other obligations which they deem necessary for the correct levying and collection of the tax and for the prevention of fraud.

Art. 4(3) TUE, as already described above, binds Member States to take all appropriate measures to effect any obligations set by the EU, which  in this case, is that of the payment and collection of VAT.

ECJ Ruling

The ECJ reiterated the obligation which Member States have to take all legislative and administrative measures appropriate for ensuring collection of all the VAT due on its territory. Although Member States have the freedom to achieve this obligation as they see fit, this freedom however is limited by the obligation to not create significant differences in the manner in which taxable persons are treated, whether it be within one Member State, or across different ones.

Despite all of the above however, the ECJ stated that none of these principles can run counter to compliance with the principle that judgement should be given within a reasonable time as under Art. 6(1) ECHR.

The ECJ, in its conclusion, ruled that the Italian tax law in question was not in violation of EU law. The main reasoning behind this judgement can be broken down into the following;

a)      Art. 3(2 bis) Decree-Law No 40/2010  is clearly in pursuit of the objective of reasonable time under Art. 6(1) ECHR .

b)     Decree-Law No 40/2010 entered into force more than 14 years after the last date on which appeals could be brought before the Commissione Tributaria Centrale, meaning that all proceedings pending before that Court have in fact lasted for over 14 years,

c)      The current case against Belvedere Costruzioni dates back to approx. 30 years, which shows that some proceedings have lasted much longer than the 14 years. The ECJ stated that “Such a length of proceedings is a priori capable in itself of infringing the reasonable time principle”

d)     The Decree-Law No 40/2010 did not constitute a general waiver of the collection of VAT for a certain period, but was in actual fact, an exceptional provision concluding the oldest proceedings pending before the tax court of third instance

e)      The Decree-Law No 40/2010 has a specific and limited nature, only applicable under certain circumstances, and so does not create significant differences in the way in which taxable persons are treated, either within Italy, or between other Member States.

The ECJ left the decision on costs to the Italian Court.

Avv. Gabriele Giambrone, Senior Partner of Giambrone Law ILP commented, “The Commissione Tributaria Centrale, Bologna were correct to submit this question to the ECJ. A law which obliges the automatic conclusion of a case, effectively taking away a third recourse, is something to take note of. I agree with the ECJ’s judgement in this case, particularly considering the age of not only the Belvedere Costruzioni dispute, but also the fact that none of the pending cases would be less than 14 years older than the Decree in question.”

If you are in need to advice concerning a tax dispute, contact our experienced team at Giambrone Law ILP.

Anne Carrion
Iain James Buchan
Avv. Gabriele Giambrone

Giambrone Law ILP
Largo Antonio Sarti, 4
00196, Rome, Italy

T:         +44 (0) 870 111 2158
+39 06 326 498
F:         +39 06 322 4233
E:         rome@giambronelaw.com  

The post An Italian tax law does not violate EU law. appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.

With other EU countries seeing much shorter delays in payments in regards to the health-care sector, the widespread problem in Italy has been brought to the forefront. In 2010 for example, whilst Italy’s average late settlement period was almost 300 days, Germany’s average was just 30 days, and the United Kingdom’s health-care authorities paid their bills with an average of only a 45-day delay.

Assobiomedica, an Italian trade group for suppliers of medical equipment have recently declared that approximately 250 members of their association are awaiting payments equal to €5.6 billion. One Assobiomedica member – Bellco, a company which produces equipment for dialysis; have made their own plight public in order to demonstrate the severity of the situation. Bellco have revealed they have been waiting for payments to be made on goods which they sold as far back as 2009; meaning the clock has been ticking along for three years without debts being paid.

The Italian association Farmindustria meanwhile, which is composed of 200 pharmaceutical member firms, have disclosed that their members are still waiting for an estimated €4 billion in unpaid bills.

The differences between countries may come as no surprise, but it also seems that there is also a noticeable difference which exists between the various regions of Italy. The pattern demonstrates that the further south the region; the longer it is a company will have to wait to get paid. Regions such as Valle d’Aosta and Friuli for example, clear their debts within around three months; whereas the southern regions of Calabria and Molise take about two years to settle their bills.

The situation is so dire that the European Commission issued a notice to Member States in April this year, after three different petitions were submitted on the subject of late payment of companies operating in the health-care sector in Italy. In the note, the EC confirmed that although Directive 200/35/EC on late payment had been transposed correctly in Italy, “the late payment in commercial transactions is still a general problem within the EU (including in Italy) and that the economic crisis is making the situation worse”.

They underlined the fact that a newer directive, Directive 2011/7/EU on combating late payment in commercial transactions was adopted in February 2011 which contains stricter provisions. The most interesting new provision is one which obligates payment for goods purchased be made within 30 days; although Member States have been given the option of extending this payment period up to a maximum of 60 days for public undertakings and public entities providing healthcare. It must also be noted that the Directive does not prohibit contracts between businesses from setting a deadline of more than 60 days, if expressly agreed between the parties, and not grossly unfair.

Seeing as Member States have been given until the 16^th March 2013 to transpose this new directive into their National law however, it surely provides little comfort to the businesses affected by severely delayed payments. This is especially so for small Italian firms, which are more likely to suffer graver consequences as a result, such as banks being less likely to be prepared to finance them with reasonable interest rates. Repercussions such as these could spell the end for some small businesses.

The European Commission itself, acknowledged that the magnitude of late payments together with its negative effects is especially damaging to the small and medium-sized firms. As a result of this particular concern, they invited Member States to consider voluntary early transposition of the Directive, “as an important means for nurturing a culture of prompt payment within the European Union”.

This is only a suggestion however and so it remains to be seen if the European Commission’s note will have any visible effect on the bleak state of unpaid debts for health-care suppliers in Italy, and all over Europe.

Avv. Gabriele Giambrone commented, “The current average delay of payments in Italy’s health-care sector is staggering. The state’s health-care authorities should be setting an example to private companies that national and European law which regulates late payment must be followed. When goods or services are provided, the payment for such goods or services needs to be made within a reasonable amount of time in accordance with the law and good business practice. With the current state of our economy, Italy cannot afford to have businesses closing down as a result of late payment and this is exactly what will happen to many small and medium enterprises who will find it increasingly hard to finance their company without being paid by their clients. Something more than an invitation for early transposition of the new Directive needs to be done, and hopefully the EU will give this matter the priority it is due.”

Have you been affected by late payment for goods and services you have provided? If so, and you would like some legal advice on the matter, contact our law firm Giambrone Law ILP.

Anne Carrion
Iain James Buchan
Avv. Gabriele Giambrone

Giambrone Law ILP
Largo Antonio Sarti, 4
00196, Rome, Italy

T:         +44 (0) 870 111 2158
+39 06 326 498
F:         +39 06 322 4233
E:         rome@giambronelaw.com  

The post Italian health-care supplier companies appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.

The trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court was one for burglary. The interpreter translated a statement made by the Romanian-speaking defendant to be that he had been “bitten” by the victim. In reality however, the defendant had actually said that he had been “beaten” by the victim.

The interpreter, who works for the translator company Applied Language Solutions (ASL), confessed that they had recognised their error at the time, but had failed to inform the Court. Once the blunder had been discovered, the trial was suspended and the jury was discharged. It is predicted that retrial costs could be around £25,000.

This case is the latest in a string of trials which have collapsed and re-adjourned as a result of problems with Applied Language Solutions since the government appointed them as the new provider for court interpreters earlier this year.

Avv. Gabriele Giambrone, Senior Partner of Giambrone Law ILP remarked, “These types of errors, though easily avoided, have grave consequences. Not only in monetary terms, but also for traumatised victims of serious crimes who are forced to testify again. The Ministry of Justice must intervene and improve the system.”

Giambrone Law ILP is a multi-lingual international law firm. We are experienced in dealing with legal matters in several languages. If you need help or advice on a legal matter and have concerns about language barriers, please feel free to contact our experienced legal team.

Anne Carrion
Iain James Buchan
Avv. Gabriele Giambrone

Giambrone Law ILP
Largo Antonio Sarti, 4
00196, Rome, Italy

T:         +44 (0) 870 111 2158
+39 06 326 498
F:         +39 06 322 4233
E:         rome@giambronelaw.com  

The post Interpreter Error appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.

The amendment being proposed, once passed, will mark the first formal recognition by the law of the rights of both divorced fathers and mothers to see their children.

The new presumption will be that, unless it is dangerous for the child, it is in the child’s best interests to see both parents. The family courts of England and Wales will be bound to use this as their starting point when presiding over a child custody case.

Although the change will recognise the rights of both parents, it is the rights of the father which has certainly brought about the need for an amendment to the law.

The government has pointed to studies showing that following a divorce, only 12% of children who reside principally with one of their parents after a divorce, are living with their father. This “bias” needs to be rectified as a child’s welfare is likely to be furthered if in contact with both parents. Ministers also highlighted a study done in 2008 which claimed that children with “highly-involved das develop better friendships, more empathy and higher levels of educational achievement and self-esteem. They are also less likely to become involved with crime or substance abuse”.

After Australian Courts struggled with a similar presumption however, it has been made clear, that the introduction of such a presumption should not be taken to mean that parents have the right to spend an equal amount of time with their children. Clarity on this point is imperative in order to avoid the risk of Courts interpreting the changes to the law incorrectly, which could cause considerable disruption to the child’s routine.

The majority of custody disputes in England and Wales are settled without resorting to court. However, Tim Loughton, the Children’s Minister said that the changes needed to be made for the disputes which end up in court, he stated; “We need to clarify and restore public confidence that the courts fully recognize the joint nature of parenting”.

The NSPCC, the children’s charity has also voiced their concerns over the introduction of the presumption. The principle fear is that such a right, when enshrined in the law, will result in the rights of the parents being recognised and put before those of the parent. This could lead to further delays in court with parents appealing rulings of the court using this new legal right.

Critics also point out that it is already common practice for judges to use such a presumption as their starting point.

It is undeniable however, that the right’s incorporation into legislation however will no doubt add weight to the importance of both parents in a child’s life and dissuade those parents who try and use the law to prohibit the other parent from access to their child.

Avv. Gabriele Giambrone commented, “The change being introduced is one which addresses a serious bias which exists, not only in England, but around the world – that of the mother automatically being considered to be the most fit parent. Sometimes this is the case, but when dealing with separations and divorces which are less amicable, there are also those who use this bias as a shield in order to cut the other parent out of the child’s life. As long as the courts ensure that their primary focus remains on the paramountcy principle as under the Children Act 1989; that is, that the child’s best interests come first, then I see no reason why this change should be seen as a negative one.”

If you are currently faced with a child custody case and would like advice, please feel free to contact Giambrone Law ILP. We have a dedicated and experienced Family Law team.

Anne Carrion
Iain James Buchan
Avv. Gabriele Giambrone

Giambrone Law ILP
Largo Antonio Sarti, 4
00196, Rome, Italy

T:         +44 (0) 870 111 2158
+39 06 326 498
F:         +39 06 322 4233
E:         rome@giambronelaw.com  

The post Good News For Fathers Custody appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.

Through our offices in Italy and abroad, we are present in key business centres. Our Italian lawyers serve clients worldwide on matters of Italian, European and international law and our clients are split almost equally between businesses, corporations and private individuals. Thanks to a network of long-standing relationships with leading law firms all over the world, we are also able to fully assist our clients on cross-border transactions

Our firm uses its eight divisions to form a full service Italian law firm with a wide range of expertise that compliments, and actively contributes to each division; our main areas of practice include Italian civil and commercial litigation, Italian Real Estate & Tax, Italian business and commercial law, Wills, Probates & Trusts and Italian tax.

We were the first Italian law firm to set up an office in Tunis, which represents an important link between our lawyers and our clients with business interests in North Africa. The Tunis office is staffed with Italian lawyers conversant on all questions of Italian law within the areas of practice of the firm.

Our Italian attorneys are proud of the success achieved by the firm over the years, and are convinced that the firm is destined to play a key role in the Italian, European and international markets for legal services in the years to come.

The post Giambrone Law ILP appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.

Under the new alliance, both firms will be able to recommend to each other, any clients which they believe will be benefited by the services of the other company.  An example would be where an Italian client of Giambrone Law ILP is looking to purchase a house on the English property market. As part of this new partnership, the client can be confident that their money is being exchanged and transferred in a secure and efficient manner. This is just one example of the many benefits the Giambrone Law ILP – Sterling Exchange Ltd partnership holds for its clients.

Avv. Gabriele Giambrone, Senior Partner of Giambrone Law ILP, commented “I am very excited to work with the Director of Sterling Exchange, Mr. Milti Christidolou, as well as everyone else at their company. The partnership is a real coup for the firm. Over the past few years Giambrone Law ILP has been involved with numerous claims and complaints against FX Brokers and we are confident that Sterling Exchange’s reputation for excellence will prove to be an asset to this partnership. The alliance will allow Giambrone Law ILP to provide a more complete and secure service to its clients, as well as allowing the firm to expand its client base. I am very confident that this will be a successful venture for both of us.”

Editors Notes:

Giambrone Law ILP is an award winning leading Italian law firm. Its strength includes over 40 lawyers serving clients around the world through its offices in Rome, Milan, Palermo, London, Tunis and New York on matters of Italian, European and international law.

Contact:                              Iain James Buchan

Address:                             Largo Antonio Sarti, 4

00196, Rome, Italy

Tel:                                       +39 06 326 498

Email:                                  ijb@giambronelaw.com

The post Giambrone Law ILP announces new partnership appeared first on Gabriele Giambrone.