The strengthening of sanctions related to the absence of DUERP

Bill relating to the fight against social and tax fraud

The bill to combat social and tax fraud, adopted on 11 May 2026, aims to strengthen sanctions related to the absence of the single occupational risk assessment document (DUERP) and its updating. From now on, the Labour Inspectorate will be able to directly sanction the employer, without going through judicial proceedings, by issuing either a warning or a fine that may reach €4,000 per concerned employee, with a 50% increase in the event of repeat offences. These provisions will become applicable after the official publication of the text in the Official Journal and subject to the decision of the Constitutional Council regarding the conformity of the bill with the Constitution.

No infringement of the right to disconnect if the employee works during a sick leave without any request from the employer

Soc. March 25, 2026, n°24-21.098

Following a dismissal, a senior executive alleged an infringement of his right to disconnect on the grounds that he had been contacted by email to perform tasks during his sick leave. He also complained about the absence of any right-to-disconnect policy within the company. The High Court held that, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, a breach of the right to disconnect could not be established where the employee had, of his own accord and without any request from the employer, taken the initiative to connect during his sick leave in order to work, even though no disconnection policy had been implemented.

Right to evidence: reminder on the conditions for the admissibility of evidence obtained in an unfair manner

Soc. April 1, 2026, 24-19.193

In the context of challenging his dismissal, an employee produced documents taken from the company director’s computer, which he had accessed without authorisation. The High Court recalls that the unlawfulness and unfairness in obtaining evidence do not automatically render it inadmissible. The judge must balance the right to evidence against the fundamental rights at stake in the dispute. In this case, the High Court held that the evidence obtained in an unfair manner was admissible as it was strictly necessary for the exercise of the rights of defence, the employee having no other means of proof enabling him to achieve the same purpose

A reclassification of a resignation always possible several months after the facts.

Soc. April 1, 2026, n°24-12.540

In this case, an employee had resigned in April 2018 without raising any reservations, and four months later sent a letter to her employer stating that her resignation resulted from a conflictual context marked by breaches by the employer and a deteriorated working environment. In March 2019, she brought the matter before the Labour Court seeking reclassification of her resignation as a constructive dismissal attributable to the employer. The Court of Cassation held that challenging the resignation several months after the termination, on the basis of evidence predating or postdating the resignation period, does not prevent the resignation from being reclassified as a constructive dismissal, provided that such elements establish the equivocal nature of the termination and the breaches attributed to the employer.