Can the employer be reimbursed by the employee? – Driving licence suspension – Litigation – Schedule of fixed compensation
Social Information Letter No. 1
Is the employer required to pay fines related to traffic violations committed by employees?
The Court of Cassation rules in the affirmative when the perpetrator of the offence remains unknown:
"In the absence of identification of the perpetrator of a speeding offense, only the legal representative of the company holding the registration certificate or lessee of the vehicle can, pursuant to the provisions of Article L 121-3 of the Highway Code, be declared financially liable for the fine incurred" (Crim. Cass. 17 April 2013 No. 12-87490).
However, to avoid incurring such fines, the employer may, upon receiving the notice of violation, request exemption from the fine by providing the identity of the offending employee.
This risks having the employee's driver's license deducted the corresponding points.
The Court of Cassation ruled against this in a case where, during a lawsuit brought by an employee contesting their dismissal, the employer sought a judgment ordering the employee to reimburse the fines related to traffic violations committed while using a company vehicle (Cass. soc. April 17, 2013, No. 11-27550).
The employer's obtaining reimbursement of a fine from the employee is considered an exercise of the employee's civil liability towards the employer. This requires gross negligence, that is, misconduct characterized by an intent to harm. This is generally not the case when an employee commits traffic violations.
Here too, the only way to avoid paying the fine is to provide the identity of the offending employee as soon as the notice is received.
Can the employer be reimbursed by the employee for fines paid?
The Court of Cassation ruled against the employer in a case where, during a lawsuit brought by an employee contesting his dismissal, the employer sought a judgment ordering the employee to reimburse the fines related to traffic violations committed while driving a company vehicle (Cass. soc. 17 April 2013, No. 11-27550).
The employer's attempt to obtain reimbursement of a fine from the employee is considered an exercise of the employee's civil liability towards the employer. However, this requires gross negligence, that is, misconduct characterized by an intent to harm. This is generally not the case when an employee commits traffic violations.
Here too, the only way to avoid paying the fine is to disclose the identity of the offending employee upon receipt of the notice.
Can a driving licence suspension for an offence committed outside of work justify dismissal?
In principle, no. This is what the Court of Cassation has just ruled again:
"The fact that an employee who uses a vehicle in the performance of his duties commits, in the context of his personal life, an offence resulting in the suspension of his driving licence cannot be regarded as a breach by the person concerned of his obligations arising from his employment contract" (Cass. soc. 10 July 2013 n° 12-16878).
Indeed, a reason stemming from an employee's personal life cannot, in principle, justify disciplinary dismissal, unless it constitutes a breach of an obligation arising from their employment contract.
The employer would therefore be well advised to explicitly stipulate in the employment contract the requirement to hold a valid driver's license.
Schedule of fixed allowances
The scale of the fixed compensation provided for in Article L. 1235-1 of the Labour Code, which may be paid by the employer in order to put an end to the dispute with the employee at the conciliation stage, has been set as follows:
- 2 months' salary if the employee has less than 2 years of seniority with the employer;
- 4 months' salary if the employee can prove seniority with the employer of between 2 years and less than 8 years;
- 8 months' salary if the employee has between 8 and less than 15 years of seniority with the employer;
- 10 months' salary if the employee can prove seniority with the employer of between 15 and 25 years;
- 14 months' salary if the employee has more than 25 years of seniority with the employer.
Decree No. 2013-72 of August 2, 2013

Chaouki Gaddada
author
associate lawyer
Repetition of old-age benefits obtained through fraud
Court of Cassation, Plenary Assembly, May 17...
Two-year statute of limitations: the Court of Cassation finally sets limits in favor of insurers
Insurers' obligation to inform the parties of the causes of interruption of the two-year limitation period does not require mentioning the entirety of Article 2243 of the Civil Code, according to which the interruption does not occur when the claimant withdraws, leaves...
Interview with Romain Picard, young partner at the law firm Arst Avocats specializing in Corporate / M&A
Today we welcome Romain Picard, a young partner at the firm Arst Avocats, who explains the reasons that led him to join the firm and tells us about his plans for developing the Corporate/M&A practice within the firm...
Repetition of old-age benefits obtained through fraud
Court of Cassation, Plenary Assembly, May 17...
Two-year statute of limitations: the Court of Cassation finally sets limits in favor of insurers
Insurers' obligation to inform the parties of the causes of interruption of the two-year limitation period does not require mentioning the entirety of Article 2243 of the Civil Code, according to which the interruption does not occur when the claimant withdraws, leaves...
Interview with Romain Picard, young partner at the law firm Arst Avocats specializing in Corporate / M&A
Today we welcome Romain Picard, a young partner at the firm Arst Avocats, who explains the reasons that led him to join the firm and tells us about his plans for developing the Corporate/M&A practice within the firm...