Must an employer launch an investigation to dismiss an employee for sexual harassment?

The French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) answered no to this question in a ruling dated January 14, 2026 (24-19.544), published in the official bulletin.

In labor law matters, evidence is freely admissible.

The Supreme Court affirmed that no provision of the French Labor Code requires an employer to conduct an internal investigation in the event of a report of sexual harassment and that it was up to the Court of Appeal to assess the value and scope of the hearings and statements submitted.

This ruling should be upheld.

1) Analysis

In the event of dismissal for sexual harassment of an employee, is the employer required to conduct an internal investigation to validly dismiss the employee?

This was the ruling issued by the Fort-de-France Court of Appeal in its judgment of June 21, 2024, which criticized the employer for initiating dismissal proceedings hastily without a thorough and adversarial investigation, as is standard practice in criminal investigations, especially when resorting to the most severe and humiliating disciplinary sanction.

The Court of Cassation overturned the Fort-de-France Court of Appeal's decision.

First, it reiterated that in labor law matters, evidence is freely admissible. In its brief, the employer stated that it had submitted numerous pieces of evidence to the court, corroborating the statements of the two victims, which showed that:

Mr. [Z] had initially hugged and attempted to kiss Ms. [C] on the mouth against her will in the company's mailroom; that she had rejected him; but that, nevertheless, a few months later, he had again hugged her and attempted to kiss her on the mouth in the same room; and that,

Regarding Ms. [W], while she was sitting at her desk participating in a conference call, Mr. [Z] had burst in, unbuttoned his trousers, and exposed himself in front of her, attempting to grab her hand so that she would touch him.

The Court of Cassation noted the evidence presented by the company to justify the dismissal, namely:

• Ms. [C]'s statements, her complaint to the police, and

• various statements from employees who testified to having heard her confidences shortly after the events, as well as the report from the psychologist who had seen her.

The Court of Appeal considered this insufficient and held that the employer should have conducted an internal investigation.

This is not the position of the Court of Cassation.

It notes that no provision of the labor code requires an employer to conduct an internal investigation in the event of a report of sexual harassment, and that it was up to the Court of Appeal to assess the value and scope of the evidence produced by the company to justify the dismissal.

Bill No. 2208 aims to provide a legislative framework for internal investigations.

Article 1 of this bill proposes to introduce a legal definition of an internal investigation into Article L4121-6 of the Labor Code, in Part Four of the Code relating to the employer's obligations regarding health and safety at work, in order to provide a normative basis.

The proposed definition defines an internal investigation as: "An internal investigation refers to a formal process conducted within a private or public organization, aimed at verifying whether the alleged facts or suspicions of violations of laws or the organization's internal rules are substantiated."

“The internal investigation must take into account the evidence relating to individuals, both incriminating and exculpatory, while respecting their rights and implementing measures proportionate to the objective set.”

“The internal investigation promotes the integrity of the private or public organization. It contributes to ensuring its compliance with laws and regulations, and to improving its governance while protecting its reputation and its members.”

In our opinion, the codification of the internal investigation (in its current wording) would not necessarily have altered the solution provided by the Court of Cassation in its judgment of January 14, 2026.

Source :

 

Pour lire l’intégralité de la brève, cliquez sur le lien ci-dessous

https://www.village-justice.com/articles/enquete-interne-employeur-doit-necessairement-declencher-une-enquete-pour,56167.html

Frédéric CHHUM avocat et ancien membre du conseil de l’ordre des avocats de Paris (mandat 2019-2021)

CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com

www.chhum-avocats.fr

https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr

.Paris: 34 rue Petrelle 75009 Paris tel: 0142560300

.Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644

.Lille: : 45, Rue Saint Etienne 59000 Lille – Ligne directe +(33) 03.20.57.53.24