Article L. 1132-1 of the Labour Code lists prohibited grounds for discrimination, including family status.
In this case, an employee was dismissed for gross misconduct by her employer, who accused her of embezzlement and of concealing her surname when she was hired. At the same time, the employee’s sister’s husband was found guilty of fraud and theft from the company.
The Court of Appeal found that the employer had not provided any evidence of the employee’s misconduct. The evidence presented only implicated the employee’s brother-in-law and sister, and made no reference to any wrongdoing on the part of the employee. However, the Court considered that the dismissal was not discriminatory on the grounds of the employee’s family situation, but simply lacked real and serious grounds.
The Court of Cassation overturned the Court of Appeal’s decision on this last point. The letter of dismissal accused the employee of:
- on the one hand, embezzlement committed by the employee’s sister’s spouse;
- on the other hand, being hired under her married name without specifying that she had the same name as her sister.
Taken together, these elements suggested the existence of discrimination on the grounds of the employee’s family situation.
When an employee presents facts that they believe constitute direct or indirect discrimination, it is up to the judge to assess whether these facts, considered collectively, suggest discrimination. If so, it is up to the employer to prove that their decisions are justified by objective factors unrelated to any discrimination.
The request for the dismissal to be declared null and void was therefore upheld.
