Cass. soc. June 11, 2025, n° 24-13.083 F-B
An employee assigned to store deliveries, after receiving a medical opinion of fitness with reservations from the occupational physician (in particular the use of an electric forklift), was sent to sites that were not equipped, in disregard of these prescriptions. Placed on sick leave, then declared unfit, he was dismissed. The Court of Appeal dismissed his application for judicial termination, holding that the employer could not have known what equipment was available at its customers’ sites.
The French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) censured this decision. It points out that Articles L. 4624-3 and L. 4624-6 of the French Labor Code require the employer to comply with the occupational physician’s recommendations, even when the employee is working for a third-party company. It is the employer’s responsibility to check that working conditions are in line with these recommendations, independently of any warning given by the employee.
The high court emphasizes that even recommendations formulated in the form of wishes are binding on the employer. In the absence of verification, the employer is in breach of his safety obligation, and dismissal for unfitness could be deemed without real and serious cause if it results from the employer’s misconduct.
References
- Cass. soc. June 11, 2025, no. 24-13.083 F-B
- Cass. soc. 19-12-2007, n° 06-46.134 F-D
- Cass. soc. 17-10-2012, n° 11-18.648 F-D
- C. trav., art. L. 4624-3 and L. 4624-6
