Economic Dismissal: Partial Cessation of Activity

Extract

[...] - This is the main ground invoked by the applicant in his appeal. - In fact, he vainly argued that the dismissals were a consequence of the closure of the IMPOSED establishment by the decision of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Lyon. - Moreover, according to the applicant, the dismissal letters, which set out the terms of the dispute (before the MACRON law), had been motivated in this sense. - This argument did not convince the two Courts, which reaffirmed that even partial cessation if it results from the fact of a third party must necessarily be justified by financial difficulties, technological mutations or a necessary reorganization to save the company's competitiveness. [...]

[...] - This is exactly what the Court of Appeal reproached the employer, relayed by the Court of Cassation. - This decision is to be linked to the judgments: Cass. soc No. 04-43353 and Cass. soc No. 07-44306, by which the Court of Cassation had already made this assessment. - The commented decision confirms this rule, which is important according to it, that the closure decision comes from a third party. (Transition for the II.b: scope of the judgment) B. The absence of the third party's impact on the origin of the partial cessation of activity. [...]

[...] Then, regarding the partial cessation of the activity, this can only justify a dismissal for economic reasons in the event of financial difficulties, technological mutations or a necessary reorganization to save the company's competitiveness, it is important, according to the Court of Cassation, that the decision to close comes from a third party. Thus, in its decision, the Court of Cassation recalled the contours of the assessment of the reason for an economic dismissal resulting from the complete cessation of activity or when it is partial notwithstanding the presence of a third party. I. The economic dismissal motivated by the complete cessation of activity. A. The complete cessation of the constitutive activity of an autonomous reason for termination. [...]

[...] - Exception to the termination based on : a fault of the employer or to his blameworthy lightness (soc January D ; Social Law 2001 / RJS 2001, n° 294) Consequence of the blameworthy lightness of the employer or his fault: dismissal without a real and serious reason (see notably in this sense: Cass. soc n° 07-41985) - These principles have been maintained with consistency by the Court of Cassation (see in this sense Cass. soc 30.10.2002, n° 00-43624) - In this case, the Court of Appeal and the Court of Cassation only recalled these notional notions. - In this ruling, the employer did not justify a complete closure of the activity. II. The economic dismissal justified by a partial cessation of the activity. A. [...]

[...] cass n° 98-44.647 and relayed by the TRAVAIL law August 2016) - In this case, the Court of Appeal and the Court of Cassation only applied these notions. B. The conditions of dismissal due to the complete cessation of activity. - Lack of legal definition of business cessation (Article L 1233-33 Al - no more than legal distinction between complete or partial cessation of activity. - Seizure of this notion by jurisprudence: cite the judgment of 05.04.1995, n° 93-42690 and Cass. soc n° 98-4464. [...]