Does a new Supreme Court decision allow partially illicit evidence to be submitted?
Published on :
19/01/2021
19
January
Jan
01
2021
A recent decision of the French Supreme Court of 25 November 2020 creates a surprising precedent on the topic of the validity of evidence that can be submitted in court.
The ruling allows evidence, deemed unlawful in regard to a law on information technology and civil liberties, to be admitted in court proceedings.
It marks an evolution of the Social Chamber's case law on the unlawfulness of evidence obtained by means of data that should have been declared to the CNIL, the French Data Protection Body.
In the case at hand, an employee (journalist) challenged his dismissal. He maintained that the evidence produced by his employer was illicit, since the files in question had not been declared to the CNIL.
The Court ruled that the unlawfulness of evidence does not systematically result in its rejection. Rather, it invites the trial judge to examine, in the context of a proportionality review, whether the infringement of the employee's personal life by such production is justified in the light of the employer's right to present evidence. It also specifies that such production must be “indispensable” and no longer merely “necessary” for the exercise of this right.
The ruling is neither entirely surprising nor shocking, in fact: it draws inspiration from the decisions of the ECHR in respect of Articles 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Those rulings had admitted evidence obtained at the expense of the right to privacy under Article 8 of the Convention or in breach of domestic law. This was justified on the basis of the right to a fair trial and the right to evidence.
History
-
Prohibiting alcohol | Post-termination non-competition clause
Published on : 01/04/2022 01 April Apr 04 2022Newsletter / Recent Case Law1) Prohibiting alcohol Internal regulations (so called “réglement intérie...
-
A settlement agreement following an employee’s report of sexual harassment is invalid / Paid leave: who bears the burden of proof?
Published on : 31/12/2021 31 December Dec 12 2021Newsletter / Recent Case LawA settlement agreement following an employee’s report of sexual harassment is...
-
Employers must react when alerted to threats to employee’s safety. Failure constitutes an inexcusable fault
Published on : 30/09/2021 30 September Sep 09 2021Newsletter / Recent Case LawIn case of an accident at work (or an occupational disease), the employer com...
-
In brief: The Islamic Veil cannot be banned without a neutrality clause, even for commercial reasons
Published on : 01/07/2021 01 July Jul 07 2021NewsNewsletter / Recent Case LawIn 2017, the French Supreme court recognized the possibility, expressed in ar...
-
False accusations of discrimination justify a disciplinary dismissal
Published on : 02/04/2021 02 April Apr 04 2021NewsNewsletter / Recent Case LawAn employee who denounces or reports acts of discrimination benefits from dis...
-
Does a new Supreme Court decision allow partially illicit evidence to be submitted?
Published on : 19/01/2021 19 January Jan 01 2021NewsNewsletter / Recent Case LawA recent decision of the French Supreme Court of 25 November 2020 creates a s...
-
This month recent case laws
Published on : 02/10/2020 02 October Oct 10 2020NewsNewsletter / Recent Case LawTransfers of undertakings to more than one business A recent surprising dec...
-
Recent case law: The Amazon Covid19 Health Case
Published on : 26/05/2020 26 May May 05 2020NewsNewsletter / Recent Case LawThe Versailles Court of Appeal confirmed that Amazon must limit its activitie...
-
News Flash Covid-19 and Business: French Court orders Amazon to limit activity to essential needs
Published on : 21/04/2020 21 April Apr 04 2020NewsNewsletter / Recent Case LawCoronavirusIn two recent court cases that are important for all employers, the French co...
-
Recent case law | Employment Guarantees in CBA’s
Published on : 12/02/2020 12 February Feb 02 2020Newsletter / Recent Case LawIn a recent case, the French Supreme Court had to rule on the scope of applic...