The pressure exerted by a director on a female employee out of romantic disappointment constitutes a breach of his duty of care regarding safety

Court of cassation, Labor div., March 26, 2025, n°23-17.544

As a preliminary point, it should be remembered that a reason based on the employee’s personal life cannot in principle justify disciplinary dismissal, unless it constitutes a breach by the employee of an obligation arising from his employment contract. In this case, each employee is bound by an safety obligation must ensure, to the best of their training and ability the health and safety of persons likely to be affected by his acts or omissions during his professional activity (C. Trav., art. L. 4122-1).

In this case, an employee, occupying the position of Director of Partnerships, was dismissed for gross misconduct due to his insistent behaviour towards a colleague following their break-up.

Contesting his dismissal the employee argued that the acts complained of related exclusively to his personal life.

The Court of Cassation confirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal, dismissed the employee’s claims. It held that the employee had breached his safety obligation based on the following elements:

• The employee persisted in to address to his colleague The employee persisted in sending emails to his colleague in his professional mailbox about their break-up, even though she had clearly expressed her wish to maintain a strictly professional relationship.
• The employee exerted pressure on this colleague who, although not his direct subordinate, occupied a position hierarchically inferior.
• This behaviour had led to a situation in which the employee the employee.

The High Court concluded that the employee’s dismissal for gross misconduct was justified.

Thus, inappropriate behaviour, even if it is not legally classified as harassment, may constitute gross misconduct if it comes from an employee in a high hierarchical position and presents a proven risk to the health or safety of another employee.