Incorrect claim for expenses does not justify dismissal
The automated procedure adopted by the company excludes fraudulent conduct by the employee
2' min read
Key points
2' min read
In the presence of an automated company system for the management of reimbursement of travel expenses, the employee's request to be reimbursed for amounts unrelated to work, as well as the production via the computerised portal of credit card receipts in the absence of the actual receipts, constitutes a mere irregularity.
It is incorrect to hold that, because the employee claimed reimbursement of expenses unconnected with the performance of work and, moreover, submitted irrelevant receipts in accordance with company policy, of which the employee herself must have been aware, there is misconduct comparable to theft. Nor is the finding that the company portal, on which the receipts for the expenses incurred were uploaded, enables the employer to carry out a post-card check only.
The existence of an automated company procedure for handling expense reimbursements, considering the ex post control by the employer of the relevant assessment of theexpense reimbursement items and their correct documentary justification, excludes conduct that is more serious than the mere irregularity in applying for reimbursement for travel days.
The position of the Supreme Court
.The Supreme Court of Cassation (Order 23189/2025) emphasises the fact that the company's management of reimbursements through the computerised portal is precisely the automated procedure that prevents fraudulent conduct from being attributed tothe employee. In this particular case, a female employee requested a refund of over EUR 920, but part of this sum (over EUR 250) was later deemed non-refundable by the company and was therefore written off from the total amount, months later.
The employer imposed the expulsive disciplinary sanction which, in the first instance, in the face of the employee's appeal against the dismissal, was declared unlawful, with the employee being awarded six months' compensation. The decision was, however, overturned on appeal, finding that the use of the company's automated computer system to claim undue expense reimbursements was indicative of conduct amounting to theft. The dismissal was confirmed and the employee ordered to pay the costs.
