Extract
[...] In this sense, the Court affirms the obligation for the employer to verify the diplomas and other professional titles of the applicant, in particular in sensitive areas, as well as to inquire about the reputation of the latter. If this is not a strict obligation, in this specific control, it estimates that in such a case, a minimum control by the employer should have been carried out, otherwise, in the event of disputes or accidents, he could then be sanctioned for these negligence by the engagement of his liability. The contribution of new precision regarding the necessity of a certain causal link The causal link is also the subject of debate in the present judgment. [...]
[...] Crim March 2010), here, on the other hand, it tends to gather the necessary conditions by its interpretation, in order to allow itself the possibility of preserving the deliberate fault. II. A strict control in concreto as to the engagement of the responsibility of the director The reflection of the Court of Cassation in the commented judgment is based on the in concreto control it makes, its interpretations are focused on the shortcomings and negligence felt during the recruitment of the pilot, creating an obligation for the employer to have an effective control of the professional skills of its employeesA). [...]
[...] Indeed, it recognizes here that these documents are not, in themselves, regulations, nevertheless, on the grounds that this document is limited to taking up, by applying it to the company and its internal management, it nevertheless derives its binding force from an order of May which is regulatory, adding that references are made to it. In addition, obligations were made regarding the conditions of the operating stage. In this, the Court recognizes here, linking this qualification to general facts, and extending the field of documents whose violation can constitute the application of article 221-6 of the Penal Code, that an operating manual deriving directly and applicable according to an order, holds its regulatory force from the latter. [...]
[...] Crim April 1997) in characterizing the certainty of the causal link when the actions have 'contributed at least in part to the death, from which results the existence of a certain causal link between the accident and the death of the victim », this also when the certainty remains ambiguous and can leave room for doubt. This is then confirmed by the words of the jurist Y. Mayaud when he affirms that « Fault is the object of all attention in cases of imprudence. The debate on the intensity of the fault tends to lose sight of the requirement of the causal link, often neglected, at least presumed and little debated, as it imposes itself as a blinding reality in most cases ». [...]
[...] Other subsidiary means are mentioned, the relevance of which does not seem useful for this commentary. Thus, it is necessary for the Court of Cassation, in its prerogative, to observe whether such facts fall within the framework of involuntary homicide with aggravating circumstances of failure to comply with a particular obligation of prudence or safety imposed by the regulation. The Court, by a control in concreto very thorough, opposes and maintains the application of Article 221-6 of the Penal Code by recognizing the causal link as certain due to a sufficient number of elements, attributes a heavy negligence to the defendants in the recruitment of the pilot and recognizes a regulatory character to the exploitation texts of the device. [...]
