Employee Dismissal for Unlawful Business Solicitation
France (FR)
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAAn employee, hired as an electrical site manager, was dismissed for gross misconduct for establishing his own electrical business without his employer's knowledge. The appellate court awarded the employee payment for notice, severance, and accrued vacation, reasoning that while he registered his business, it was not established that he had solicited business or breached his non-compete obligation, leaving the reason for surrendering his professional card to two employees uncertain. The high court quashed this decision, ruling that the appellate court violated labor code articles by concluding there was no gross misconduct when its own findings showed the employee had registered his business, immediately began soliciting, and distributed professional cards identifying his new venture to two of the employer's workers, which constitutes gross misconduct forfeiting indemnity rights.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAEmployee Dismissal for Unlawful Business Solicitation: The appellate court awarded the employee payment for notice, severance, and accrued vacation, reasoning that while he registered his business, it was not established that he had solicited business or breached his non-compete obligation, leaving the reason for surrendering his professional card to two employees uncertain. The high court quashed this decision, ruling that the appellate court violated labor code articles by concluding there was no gross misconduct when its own findings showed the employee had registered his business, immediately began soliciting, and distributed professional cards identifying his new venture to two of the employer's workers, which constitutes gross misconduct forfeiting indemnity rights.
Mots-clés
Généré par l'IADécisions connexes
Généré par l'IAQuestions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator
Généré par l'IAThese articles are cited in the preamble to the reasoning concerning the alleged fault, which justified the cassation of the lower court's decision.
Texte complet
SUR LE MOYEN UNIQUE :
VU LES ARTICLES L. 122-6, L. 122-8, L. 122-9 ET L. 223-14 DU CODE DU TRAVAIL;
ATTENDU QUE LOUIS, EMBAUCHE EN AVRIL 1968, EN QUALITE DE CHEF DE CHANTIER ELECTRICIEN, PAR SALMON, QUI EXPLOITE UNE ENTREPRISE GENERALE D'ELECTRICITE, A ETE LICENCIE LE 14 DECEMBRE 1977, POUR FAUTE LOURDE, AU MOTIF QU'IL AVAIT CREE SA PROPRE ENTREPRISE GENERALE D'ELECTRICITE A L'INSU DE SON EMPLOYEUR; ATTENDU QUE, POUR CONDAMNER SALMON A PAYER DES INDEMNITES DE PREAVIS, DE LICENCIEMENT ET DE CONGES PAYES A LOUIS, L'ARRET ATTAQUE A ENONCE QU'IL N'Y AVAIT PAS FAUTE GRAVE, QUE SI LOUIS S'ETAIT INSCRIT A LA CHAMBRE DES METIERS COMME CHEF D'UNE ENTREPRISE D'ELECTRICITE GENERALE, IL N'ETAIT PAS ETABLI QU'IL EUT DEJA FAIT DE LA PROSPECTION ET CONTREVENU A L'OBLIGATION DE NON-CONCURRENCE QU'IL AVAIT ENVERS SON EMPLOYEUR, LE MOTIF DE LA REMISE DE SA CARTE PROFESSIONNELLE PAR LUI A DEUX EMPLOYES DEMEURANT INCERTAIN;
QU'EN STATUANT AINSI, ALORS QU'IL RESSORTAIT DE SES PROPRES CONSTATATIONS QUE LOUIS S'ETAIT INSCRIT AU REPERTOIRE DES METIERS, LE 1ER NOVEMBRE 1977, EN QUALITE D'ENTREPRENEUR EN ELECTRICITE GENERALE ET AVAIT AUSSITOT COMMENCE A FAIRE DE LA PROSPECTION EN DISTRIBUANT A DEUX AUTRES OUVRIERS DE L'ENTREPRISE SALMON DES CARTES PROFESSIONNELLES MENTIONNANT L'ADRESSE ET LA NATURE D'ACTIVITE DE SA PROPRE ENTREPRISE, CE QUI CONSTITUAIT A SA CHARGE UNE FAUTE LOURDE PRIVATIVE DES INDEMNITES DE RUPTURE ET DE CONGES PAYES, LA COUR D'APPEL A VIOLE LES TEXTES SUSVISES;
PAR CES MOTIFS :
CASSE ET ANNULE L'ARRET RENDU ENTRE LES PARTIES LE 28 FEVRIER 1979 PAR LA COUR D'APPEL DE REIMS; REMET, EN CONSEQUENCE, LA CAUSE ET LES PARTIES AU MEME ET SEMBLABLE ETAT OU ELLES ETAIENT AVANT LEDIT ARRET ET, POUR ETRE FAIT DROIT, LES RENVOIE DEVANT LA COUR D'APPEL DE NANCY.