Paid leave and sick leave: the Supreme Court issues new reversals
Soc., September 10, 2025, no 23-22.732 and no 23-14.455
The Supreme Court has issued two new reversals of case law. Firstly, employees are now recognized the right to carry over paid leave when a sick leave occurs during that period. Secondly, paid leave must henceforth be considered when calculating the threshold for overtime hours.

Sick leave: breaching the statutory prohibition on professional activity constitutes misconduct
Soc., June 25, 2025, no 24-16.172
An employee covered by the national status of the electricity and gas industries (IEG) who performs paid work without authorization while on sick leave may be dismissed for gross misconduct without the employer having to prove actual harm. This ruling relies on specific IEG provisions strictly prohibiting such activity during sick leave. It represents a distinction from the case law applicable to non-regulated situations in this matter and confirms the requirement to prove the existence of actual harm to discipline or dismiss an employee in a similar situation.

Harassment: the absence of a specific internal investigation may constitute a breach of the duty of care
Defender of Rights, Decision no 2025-130 of July 7, 2025
Failing to conduct an internal investigation specifically dedicated to acts of sexual harassment reported by an employee in the course of her duties, when such an investigation was necessary, may constitute a breach by the employer of its health and safety obligations. An inquiry into other matters, even if related to the same work group, cannot substitute for a specific investigation into the allegations of sexual harassment.

Professional inadequacy: the employer must train and support the employee before dismissing them
Soc., July 9, 2025, no 24-16.405
Notifying an employee of performance shortcomings and issuing warnings on this matter is not sufficient to justify dismissal for professional inadequacy. The Supreme Court reiterates that the employer must also demonstrate that it has provided the necessary training and support to enable the employee to reach the expected standard.

Management fees: beware of the risk of requalification as remuneration by the URSSAF
Court of Appeal of Aix-en-Provence, July 3, 2025, no 24/05530
Amounts paid by a company to its parent company under service contracts may be reclassified as remuneration for the executive. In this case, the URSSAF considered that the amounts invoiced did not correspond to genuine external services, but in fact remunerated the management functions performed by the CEO, who also serves as manager of the parent company. The Supreme Court confirmed this analysis, emphasizing that the billed tasks normally fall within the responsibilities of an executive and that the overall remuneration did not clearly distinguish between technical duties and managerial responsibilities.