Interviewer (Laure Joncour): Good afternoon Marie-Thé.
Interviewee (Marie-Thérèse Eugénio): Good afternoon Laure.
Interviewer (Laure Joncour): One of the hot topics at the moment in France is the famous Viveo case. I believe it is about the risk of nullity of a job saving scheme when there is no real economic reason to dismiss.
Interviewee (Marie-Thérèse Eugénio): Yes. You’re right. The issue here is that when there is no real and serious ground of dismissal, the law says that the dismissal is unfair, the sanction being that the employees are only entitled to damages. In the Viveo matter, the employees’ lawyer decided to go one step further and requested the nullity of the mass redundancy scheme implemented by the company. In such case, the sanction is much more severe as the employees can ask to be reinstated or can be awarded more substantial damages.
Interviewer (Laure Joncour): And so, what is the position of the Labour Courts?
Interviewee (Marie-Thérèse Eugénio): Before the Court of Appeal, the employees were successful and the mass redundancy scheme was held to be null and void due to the lack of a valid economic ground of dismissal.
Interviewer (Laure Joncour): I assume employers and their lawyers became very nervous.
Interviewee (Marie-Thérèse Eugénio): Yes indeed. The decision of the Court of Appeal has been the subject of much discussion and it has mostly been criticised. So, everybody was relieved when the French Supreme Court cancelled it and chose to continue to apply its traditional position, which consists in applying strictly the law.
Interviewer (Laure Joncour): So, is the matter settled definitely?
Interviewee (Marie-Thérèse Eugénio): Unfortunately, not yet, as the case must now be heard by another Court of Appeal. Also, we have noted that employees’ lawyers are continuing to lodge new claims on the same basis.
Interviewer (Laure Joncour): Thank you for this. Now moving on to another topic, I have heard that the criminal statute on sexual harassment has been annulled by the Constitutional Court based on the grounds that the provision of the French Criminal Code was too vague.
Interviewee (Marie-Thérèse Eugénio):Yes. Sexual harassment was merely defined as the act of harassing someone in order to obtain benefits of a sexual nature. The main consequence of this decision is that now no one can be convicted nor punished on the ground of sexual harassment as the offence no longer exists. Instructions have however been given by the government to try to use another existing legal basis.
Interviewer (Laure Joncour): Is it expected that a new sexual harassment law will be voted?
Interviewee (Marie-Thérèse Eugénio): Yes, the new government has mentioned that a new law should be expected by next Autumn.
Interviewer (Laure Joncour): And what about the definition of sexual harassment in the Employment Law Code, as I believe it is more or less the same as the one in the Criminal Code?
Interviewee (Marie-Thérèse Eugénio): To date, this provision has not been affected by the decision of the Constitutional Court but it is anticipated that it would also be cancelled if the question was raised before the Constitutional Court.
Interviewer (Laure Joncour): Thank you very much Marie-Thé.
Interviewee (Marie-Thérèse Eugénio): My pleasure.
Back to top