FILTER Home News & Events PROTECTED EMPLOYEES AND CANCELLATION OF THE DISMISSAL AUTHORIZATION: JUDICIAL TERMINATION IS IMPOSSIBLE! 22 November 2021 through Marie-Noëlle Katchadourian Subscribe to the news The industrial tribunal cannot rule on a request for judicial termination made by a protected employee once the latter has been dismissed, even if the referral to the judge is prior to the termination. It is also irrelevant whether the administrative authorization was subsequently canceled. The protected employee has the option of requesting the judicial termination of his employment contract in the event of default by the employer ( Cass. Soc. March 16, 2005, no. 03-40251 ). When the termination is pronounced at the fault of the employer, the termination produces the effects of a null dismissal for violation of the protective status ( Cass. Soc. 26 Sept. 2006, n ° 05-41890 ). The fact remains that when a dismissal has been notified following an administrative authorization for dismissal granted to the employer, the judicial judge cannot without violating the principle of the separation of powers rule on a request for judicial termination made by the employee even if his referral was prior to the termination ( Cass. soc. 29 Sept. 2010, n ° 09-41127 ). But what about the cancellation of the dismissal authorization? In a judgment of November 10, 2021 ( n ° 20-12604 ), the social chamber of the Court of Cassation answers this question about an employee holding a mandate as a labor adviser. In this case, the Court of Appeal held that the employer had breached its obligation to perform the employment contract in good faith and had ordered the legal termination of the contract. Thus, according to her, the rupture produced the effects of a null dismissal for violation of the protective status. The employer was ordered to pay 80,000 euros in damages for the null dismissal and 234,726 euros in damages for violation of protective status. Mais la Cour de cassation ne partage pas cette analyse. Elle décide que le contrat de travail du salarié protégé, « licencié sur le fondement d’une autorisation administrative ensuite annulée et qui ne demande pas sa réintégration » est rompu par l’effet du licenciement. Dès lors, puisque le contrat est d’ores et déjà rompu, la juridiction prud’homale ne saurait se prononcer sur une demande de résiliation judiciaire. Le contrat ne peut être rompu deux fois ! La solution n’est pas nouvelle (Cass. soc. 11 oct. 2017, n°16-14529) ; elle emporte des conséquences indemnitaires non négligeables. En effet, d’après la Cour de cassation, lorsque l’annulation est devenue définitive, le salarié a droit conformément à l’article L. 2422-4 du code du travail : au paiement d’une indemnité égale à la totalité du préjudice subi au cours de la période écoulée entre son licenciement et l’expiration du délai de deux mois suivant la notification de la décision d’annulation, au paiement des indemnités de rupture s’il n’en a pas bénéficié lors du licenciement, et le cas échéant, à l’indemnité due en cas de licenciement sans cause réelle et sérieuse (L. 1235-3 du code du travail). Autrement dit, dans la présente affaire - et contrairement à ce qu’avait retenu la Cour d’appel - le salarié n’avait notamment pas droit à l’indemnité forfaitaire due en cas de violation du statut protecteur ! A question remains nonetheless. If the employee had requested his reinstatement following the cancellation of the dismissal authorization by the judgment of the administrative court, would his request for judicial termination have been likely to succeed? This seems to result from the wording used by the Court of Cassation in its decision. Read more KEY WORDS protected employees judicial termination cancellation of dismissal authorization ON THE SAME THEME NEWS LEARNING REFORM, OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLUBS ... 01 October 2018 The law “for the freedom to choose one's professional future” of September 5, 2018 has a major impact. Read more Footer Menu 2d line Manage cookies Legal Notice Sitemap Personal data protection policy FIDAL and its partners use cookies and other tracers when browsing our website. Some cookies that we use are not subject to user consent because they are strictly necessary for the proper functioning and use of the website. Other cookies, subject to the user's consent, allow FIDAL to be able to measure the performance of its website, add certain features allowing you to link to social networks or video or podcast platforms. . The list of cookies used and partners operating them are available by clicking on this link. You have the choice to accept or refuse all cookies subject to consent at once by clicking on the dedicated buttons (accept all / refuse all) for these purposes. You can also configure your choices more finely by clicking on "manage my choices". Refusing consent cookies can lead to the absence of certain features (quick sharing on social networks, direct access to video content, etc.). This refusal will not however disrupt your browsing on our site. Your choices are kept for 6 months. At the end of this period, FIDAL will request new choices about cookies. You can also withdraw your consent to cookies at any time through a dedicated link that you can find at the bottom of every page of our site. For more information, we recommend that you consult our cookie policy. Accept all Refuse everything Manage my choices