In a ruling dated 14 January 2026 (French Supreme Court, 14 January 2026, No. 24-13.234), the French Supreme Court confirmed that, at the stage of an internal investigation, the rights of defence do not require that the employee concerned be granted access to the investigation file, be confronted with witnesses, or necessarily be heard during the investigation.
Background
A regional vice-president was dismissed for serious misconduct following an internal investigation triggered by a whistleblower report. He challenged the termination of his employment contract, arguing in particular that the investigation breached his rights of defence because he had not been granted access to the evidence gathered, had not been confronted with the colleagues who made allegations against him, and had not been properly heard.
Decision of the Court of Appeal
The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal, finding that the employee had been informed of the investigation and of the nature of the alleged misconduct and had been able to provide explanations.
French Supreme Court’s decision
The French Supreme Court confirmed the decision, holding that respect for the rights of defence and the adversarial principle does not require, during an internal investigation aimed at verifying alleged misconduct, that the employee concerned:
- be granted access to the investigation file and collected evidence;
- be confronted with colleagues who have made allegations;
- or necessarily be heard during the investigation.
The Court emphasised that the employer’s subsequent decision and the evidence relied upon may, where appropriate, be fully debated before the courts. In the present case, the employee had been informed of the existence of the investigation, of the nature of the alleged misconduct, and had been able to present his explanations, which supported the admissibility of the investigation report.
Practical takeaway
Employers are not required, during the investigation phase, to organise confrontation between employees or provide access to the investigation file, provided that the evidence relied upon can subsequently be debated before the courts.
