This newsletter reviews four recent significant judicial decisions on health, safety and working conditions:
The duty to prevent harassment is distinct from, and should not be confused with, the prohibition of harassment itself (Cass. soc., 5 January 2022, n20-14.927)
The struggle against all forms of aggression at work continues to occupy the courts. This case is illustrative of the trend that courts increasingly focus on the importance of preventing harassment.
An employee made a written report to his superiors detailing his unhappiness at work, that he did not understand why he was not advancing in his career, and that the president of the company had reacted violently and disproportionately towards him during a recent incident. The employer did not take any action.
The employee was dismissed and brought a complaint before the Employment Tribunal. He sought mainly payment of damages due to the employer’s failure to prevent harassment.
The Court of Appeals dismissed his claims, ruling that the employee was not a victim of harassment and that therefore he could not claim any damages for the employer’s supposed failure in its duty to prevent harassment.
The employee appealed to the French Supreme Court, arguing that the duty to prevent harassment was distinct from, and should not be confused with, the prohibition of harassment itself.
The French Supreme Court agreed with his reasoning. It held that his former employer had failed in its duty to prevent harassment by...
Dozens claimed returning to homophobic Bangladesh would put their lives at risk. British immigration police are cracking down on a suspected criminal network believed to be behind dozens of fake as...