Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
79-42178 Généré par l'IA

Employer Appeal of Abusive Dismissal Ruling of Union Delegate

Numéro de cause 79-42178
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction France (FR)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

An employer appealed a ruling that condemned him to pay damages for the abusive dismissal of a union delegate, arguing the appellate court failed to address his claim that he received notice of the employee's union delegate status only after convening the prerequisite dismissal interview, and that distributing flyers with false allegations should constitute a serious cause for termination. The high court rejected the appeal, affirming that the appellate court had correctly relied on an irrevocable prior judgment confirming the employee's recognized union delegate status, which the employer knew about before the dismissal notice, and reasonably concluded that the alleged facts, occurring during the normal exercise of union functions, did not represent a real and serious ground for dismissal, thereby legally justifying the decision.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 455 du code de procedure civile, L. 122-15 du code du travail, L. 122-14 du code du travail, L. 122-13 du code du travail, Art. 1351 du code civil; Employer Appeal of Abusive Dismissal Ruling of Union Delegate: The high court rejected the appeal, affirming that the appellate court had correctly relied on an irrevocable prior judgment confirming the employee's recognized union delegate status, which the employer knew about before the dismissal notice, and reasonably concluded that the alleged facts, occurring during the normal exercise of union functions, did not represent a real and serious ground for dismissal, thereby legally justifying the decision.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
résiliation abusive motifs de cassation résiliation immédiate droits syndicaux motifs valables recours du personnel

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 455 du code de procedure civile
The provision is cited in the unique ground of appeal concerning the failure to answer the conclusions, which was implicitly rejected by the Court of Cassation's finding that the lower court's decision was legally justified.
L. 122-15 du code du travail
This provision regarding the justification for termination is implicitly validated as the lower court's decision based on its interpretation was upheld.
L. 122-14 du code du travail
This provision regarding the justification for termination is implicitly validated as the lower court's decision based on its interpretation was upheld.
L. 122-13 du code du travail
This provision regarding the justification for termination is implicitly validated as the lower court's decision based on its interpretation was upheld.
Art. 1351 du code civil
This provision concerning the authority of the previous judgment (res judicata) is implicitly validated as the lower court's decision based on this point was upheld.
Généré par l'IA
91-43976
Employer Appeal Against Unlawful Dismissal of Union Delegate
71-40444
Abusive Dismissal of Staff Delegate Candidates Upheld
00-60144
Employer Appeal of Union Delegate Designation Dismissed
94-85783
Employer Liable for Dismissing Union Delegate After Company Division
86-43908
Employer Appeal of Abusive Dismissal Ruling Regarding Prior Sanctioned Conduct

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 455 du code de procedure civile

The provision is cited in the unique ground of appeal concerning the failure to answer the conclusions, which was implicitly rejected by the Court of Cassation's finding that the lower court's decision was legally justified.

L. 122-15 du code du travail

This provision regarding the justification for termination is implicitly validated as the lower court's decision based on its interpretation was upheld.

L. 122-14 du code du travail

This provision regarding the justification for termination is implicitly validated as the lower court's decision based on its interpretation was upheld.

L. 122-13 du code du travail

This provision regarding the justification for termination is implicitly validated as the lower court's decision based on its interpretation was upheld.

Art. 1351 du code civil

This provision concerning the authority of the previous judgment (res judicata) is implicitly validated as the lower court's decision based on this point was upheld.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

SUR LE MOYEN UNIQUE, PRIS DE LA VIOLATION DES ARTICLES L. 122-13, L. 122-14 ET L. 122-15 DU CODE DU TRAVAIL, 1351 DU CODE CIVIL ET 455 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE CIVILE, DEFAUT DE REPONSE AUX CONCLUSIONS, DEFAUT DE MOTIFS ET MANQUE DE BASE LEGALE :

ATTENDU QUE M. JEAN-MARIE X... REPROCHE A L'ARRET ATTAQUE DE L'AVOIR CONDAMNE A PAYER LES DOMMAGES-INTERETS POUR RUPTURE ABUSIVE DE SON CONTRAT DE TRAVAIL A M. BERNARD Y..., QU'IL AVAIT ENGAGE LE 17 JUIN 1975 COMME DESSINATEUR ET LICENCIE LE 3 DECEMBRE 1977, AVEC DISPENSE D'EXECUTER LE PREAVIS, ALORS, D'UNE PART, QUE LA COUR D'APPEL A DECIDE QUE LA QUALITE DE DELEGUE SYNDICAL DE Y... ETAIT OPPOSABLE A L'EMPLOYEUR, SANS REPONDRE AUX CONCLUSIONS DE CELUI-CI FAISANT VALOIR QUE LA CORRESPONDANCE AYANT PORTE A SA CONNAISSANCE LA QUALITE DE DELEGUE SYNDICAL DE M.

Y... LUI ETAIT PARVENUE POSTERIEUREMENT A L'ENVOI DE LA LETTRE LE CONVOQUANT A L'ENTRETIEN PREALABLE A SON LICENCIEMENT ET QUE CE SALARIE NE BENEFICIAIT DONC PAS DE LA PROTECTION ACCORDEE AUX DELEGUES SYNDICAUX, ET ALORS, D'AUTRE PART, QUE L'ARRET ATTAQUE NE POUVAIT DECIDER QUE LA DISTRIBUTION, PAR UN DELEGUE SYNDICAL, DE TRACTS CONTENANT DES ALLEGATIONS MENSONGERES NE CONSTITUAIT PAS UNE CAUSE REELLE ET SERIEUSE DE LICENCIEMENT PUISQU'UNE TELLE ATTITUDE DU SALARIE A UN CARACTERE FAUTIF JUSTIFIANT LA RUPTURE DU CONTRAT DE TRAVAIL ;

MAIS ATTENDU QU'APRES AVOIR RELEVE QU'UN JUGEMENT DU TRIBUNAL D'INSTANCE DE SAINT-DIZIER DU 8 FEVRIER 1978, DEVENU IRREVOCABLE, AVAIT CONSTATE QUE M. X... N'AVAIT ELEVE AUCUNE CONTESTATION DANS LES QUINZE JOURS QUI AVAIENT SUIVI LA DESIGNATION DE M. Y... COMME DELEGUE SYNDICAL CFDT DANS SON ENTREPRISE ET AVAIT DECIDE QUE CE SALARIE AVAIT LA QUALITE DE DELEGUE SYNDICAL ET QUE SA DESIGNATION ETAIT OPPOSABLE A M. X..., LA COUR D'APPEL ENONCE QUE L'EMPLOYEUR AVAIT EU CONNAISSANCE DE LA DESIGNATION AVANT L'ENVOI DE LA LETTRE DE CONVOCATION DE M. Y... A L'ENTRETIEN PREALABLE A SON CONGEDIEMENT, QU'IL N'AVAIT PAS SOLLICITE L'AUTORISATION DE L'INSPECTEUR DU TRAVAIL ET QUE LES FAITS QU'IL REPROCHAIT A M. Y..., SURVENUS AU COURS DE L'EXERCICE NORMAL ET NON ABUSIF DE SES FONCTIONS SYNDICALES, NE CONSTITUAIENT PAS UN MOTIF REEL ET SERIEUX DE LICENCIEMENT ; QU'EN L'ETAT DE CES CONSTATATIONS ET APPRECIATIONS, LA COUR D'APPEL A, SANS ENCOURIR LES GRIEFS DU MOYEN, LEGALEMENT JUSTIFIE SA DECISION ;

PAR CES MOTIFS :

REJETTE LE POURVOI FORME CONTRE L'ARRET RENDU LE 13 JUIN 1979 PAR LA COUR D'APPEL DE DIJON.