An employee was dismissed for serious misconduct following a whistleblowing report and an internal investigation. Before the Court of Cassation, he primarily argued that his dismissal was void. He claimed that he had not been adequately informed of the alleged facts and that the identities of those involved had not been disclosed, preventing him from mounting an effective defence. He also challenged the admissibility of the investigation report, arguing that it undermined the fairness of the proceedings.
However, the Court of Cassation rejected these arguments, stating that respect for the rights of defence and the adversarial principle does not require an employee to have access to the file and evidence gathered during an internal investigation conducted to verify the veracity of actions reported by other employees. Nor does it require the employee to be confronted with the colleagues who are accusing them or to be heard. The important thing is that the employer’s decision, or the evidence on which it is based, can be discussed before a judge.
In this case, the employee had been informed of the internal investigation and the nature of the alleged actions and had been given the opportunity to explain himself regarding the allegations against him, particularly during the investigation. Consequently, the investigation report had not been drawn up without the employee’s knowledge, nor had it been obtained through manipulation or ruse. It was therefore admissible.
