- What just happened?
In this decision, the French Supreme Court ruled that an employee must demonstrate actual harm resulting from a procedural irregularity in the redundancy process to be entitled to compensation.
- Quick background
During the preliminary meeting, an employee received a document regarding the French CSP scheme (“contrat de sécurisation professionnelle”), i.e. a government financed outplacement scheme, and the economic note explaining the reasons why the Company had to make her redundant. On the same day she accepted the CSP scheme, the employer sent her a registered letter:
- to confirm the termination of her employment contract based on the employee’s subscription to the CSP scheme;
- informing her that she benefited from a right of first refusal for reemployment (“priorité de réembauche”) for a one-year period after the termination.
Before the termination, the employee challenged her redundancy, arguing that she had not been informed of her right of first refusal before making her decision to subscribe to the CSP scheme. She claimed that this irregularity should entitle her to compensation.
- Legal Issue
The key legal question was whether the employer’s failure to provide the information regarding the right of first refusal before the employee accepted the CSP, amounted to a breach of procedural obligations. The employee argued that this omission impacted her decision-making process, while the employer claimed that she had ultimately received the necessary information before her redundancy was formalized.
- The Court’s decision
The French Supreme Court emphasized that, under French law, an employee must prove actual harm resulting from a procedural irregularity to obtain compensation.
In this case, the Court judged that the employee did not suffer any loss due to the employer’s failure to provide her with information regarding the right of first refusal prior to her acceptance of the CSP scheme. There was no evidence that the timing of the information had affected her decision to accept the CSP.
- Conclusion
This ruling reinforces the principle that a procedural irregularity does not automatically entitle an employee to compensation—they must also demonstrate actual harm. While employers should ensure strict compliance with redundancy procedures, this judgment limits employees’ ability to claim compensation for procedural breaches unless they can prove a direct impact on their rights or decision-making.