In a ruling dated March 18, 2026, No. 24-18.976, the Social Chamber of the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) addressed the legality of using a geolocation system to monitor the working hours of distributors of advertising flyers and free newspapers.
It affirmed, for the first time, that: "the use of a geolocation system to monitor working hours is lawful only when such monitoring cannot be carried out by other means, and is not justified when the employee has freedom in organizing their work."
The lower court judges upheld the employer's right to use geolocation due to the employees' lack of freedom in organizing their work and the absence of any alternative to this system for ensuring objective, reliable, and accessible monitoring of their working hours.
***
III. Decision of the Court of Cassation
The Court of Cassation dismissed the appeal.
The Court of Cassation, citing Article L1121-1 of the French Labor Code, reaffirmed the principle established in its previous 2018 ruling, which states: "The use of a geolocation system to monitor working hours is lawful only when such monitoring cannot be achieved by any other means, even if less effective, and is not justified when the employee has freedom in organizing their work" [3].
It then relies on the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which, on the basis of the Working Time Directive of 4 November 2023 and Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, holds that Member States must require employers to implement an objective, reliable and accessible system for measuring the duration of daily working time performed by each worker [4].
This obligation contributes to improving the safety and health of workers, as defined by Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989.
Finally, it reiterates the provisions of Article D3171-8 of the French Labor Code concerning the methods for calculating working time when employees in a workshop, department, or team do not work according to the same posted collective work schedule. In this case, the working time of each employee concerned is calculated as follows:
1° Daily, by recording, using any means, the start and end times of each work period or by recording the number of hours worked;
2° Weekly, by summarizing, using any means, the number of hours worked by each employee.
She concludes that in this case the use of the geolocation system was lawful, the judges having noted, "on the one hand, that the distribution employees did not have freedom in this case in the organization of their work and that the geolocation tool did not entail any restriction on the autonomy they had in defining distribution times, and on the other hand, that no other device made it possible to ensure objective, reliable and accessible control of the working hours of these employees".
The lower courts' review must therefore cover both of these conditions.
IV. Analysis.
Geolocation is a sensitive tool.
While geolocation is a particularly effective tool for monitoring working hours, it can be especially intrusive into an employee's private life and conflict with Article L1121-1 of the French Labor Code and its principle of proportionality.
The risk that geolocation poses to employees' individual freedoms, and in particular to the right to privacy, therefore necessitates strict regulation of this IT system and verification of its appropriate and compliant use.
The Court of Cassation rigorously reviews the legality of geolocation systems by considering both the justification and proportionality of the infringement on employees' freedoms. The court first noted that distributors have only very limited autonomy in organizing their work, restricted to choosing their daily schedules, which precludes the existence of genuine organizational freedom that would prevent monitoring.
Judge Philippe Florès had stated that "geolocation cannot be permitted when the employee has freedom in organizing their work."
Indeed, its use in such circumstances is incompatible with the employee's organizational independence.
Therefore, the use of geolocation does not constitute an unjustified infringement on their autonomy, especially since the system is activated voluntarily, limited to delivery periods, and can be deactivated at any time. The High Court found this method of monitoring to be necessary and proportionate, emphasizing that it does not allow for constant surveillance or tracking of personal movements, and that it relies on the intervention of a trusted third party. Above all, it upholds the lower court judges' assessment that no other less intrusive system could ensure objective, reliable, and accessible monitoring of working time, given the specific characteristics of mobile work subject to numerous uncertainties.
This refers to the case law concerning the principle of subsidiarity of geolocation systems [5], a principle that can also be linked to the requirement of proportionality to the intended purpose, as outlined in Article L1121-1 of the French Labor Code, which implies finding the tool that least infringes on individual liberties.
The Court of Cassation adopts a concrete and demanding approach to proportionality, accepting geolocation as a subsidiary means of monitoring, provided it is strictly regulated.
Thus, the Court of Cassation identifies two cumulative conditions for the legality of geolocation of mobile employees: very limited autonomy and the absence of a reliable alternative. This solution, which is linked to a specific category of mobile workers, should not be generalized and should not necessarily be extended to other employee categories who could benefit from greater autonomy, such as sales representatives.
To read the full article, click on the link below.
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
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
Pas de contribution, soyez le premier