{"id":19412,"date":"2020-10-02T08:07:49","date_gmt":"2020-10-02T06:07:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/facebook-la-cour-de-cassation-valide-sous-conditions-la-preuve-tiree-dun-compte-prive\/"},"modified":"2022-09-19T14:48:24","modified_gmt":"2022-09-19T12:48:24","slug":"facebook-la-cour-de-cassation-valide-sous-conditions-la-preuve-tiree-dun-compte-prive","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/facebook-la-cour-de-cassation-valide-sous-conditions-la-preuve-tiree-dun-compte-prive\/","title":{"rendered":"Facebook : la Cour de cassation valide, sous conditions, la preuve tir\u00e9e d\u2019un compte priv\u00e9"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">Dans un arr\u00eat du 30 septembre promis \u00e0 la plus large publication, la Cour de cassation juge qu\u2019un \u00e9l\u00e9ment extrait du compte <em>Facebook<\/em> priv\u00e9 d\u2019un salari\u00e9 est une preuve recevable au soutien de son licenciement (Cass. soc., 30 septembre 2020, n\u00b0 19-12.058).<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">En l\u2019esp\u00e8ce, une salari\u00e9e, chef de projet export au sein d\u2019une entreprise de l\u2019habillement, a \u00e9t\u00e9 licenci\u00e9e pour faute grave pour avoir publi\u00e9, sur son compte <em>Facebook<\/em> personnel, des photos d\u2019une nouvelle collection avant le d\u00e9marrage de la campagne promotionnelle officielle.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">La salari\u00e9e a saisi la juridiction prud\u2019homale en contestation de ce licenciement. Au dernier \u00e9tat, la Cour d\u2019appel avait reconnu la validit\u00e9 du licenciement \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re de la production par l\u2019employeur de la publication litigieuse.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">La salari\u00e9e a form\u00e9 un pourvoi en soutenant que son licenciement ne pouvait \u00eatre valablement fond\u00e9 et justifi\u00e9 par un \u00e9l\u00e9ment issu de son compte <em>Facebook<\/em> personnel et dont l\u2019acc\u00e8s \u00e9tait priv\u00e9 et non accessible au public non\u00a0\u00ab\u00a0ami\u00a0\u00bb.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><strong>La Cour de cassation rejette le pourvoi form\u00e9 par la salari\u00e9e et consid\u00e8re que la preuve tir\u00e9e d\u2019un compte <em>Facebook<\/em> personnel et dont l\u2019acc\u00e8s est priv\u00e9 n\u2019est pas, en soi, irrecevable. <\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">Dans ce cadre, la Haute Cour fixe les conditions et limites \u00e0 la production d\u2019un tel \u00e9l\u00e9ment de preuve.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">Tout d\u2019abord, la Cour rappelle qu\u2019en vertu du principe de loyaut\u00e9 dans l\u2019administration de la preuve,<strong> l\u2019employeur ne peut pas avoir recours \u00e0 un stratag\u00e8me pour obtenir un \u00e9l\u00e9ment de preuve.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">Cependant, tel n\u2019\u00e9tait pas le cas en l\u2019esp\u00e8ce d\u00e8s lors que la publication <em>Facebook<\/em> litigieuse avait \u00e9t\u00e9 communiqu\u00e9e \u00e0 l\u2019employeur spontan\u00e9ment par une autre salari\u00e9e, elle-m\u00eame \u00ab\u00a0amie\u00a0<em>Facebook <\/em>\u00bb de la salari\u00e9e licenci\u00e9e et pouvant \u00e0 ce titre acc\u00e9der \u00e0 ses publications.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">Ensuite, la Cour pr\u00e9cise que le droit \u00e0 la preuve peut justifier une atteinte \u00e0 la vie priv\u00e9e du salari\u00e9, <strong>sous r\u00e9serve que la production de l\u2019\u00e9l\u00e9ment de preuve en question soit indispensable et que l\u2019atteinte soit proportionn\u00e9e au but recherch\u00e9.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">Sur ce point, les magistrats consid\u00e8rent que la production d\u2019une publication <em>Facebook<\/em> priv\u00e9e constituait une atteinte \u00e0 la vie priv\u00e9e de la salari\u00e9e.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">N\u00e9anmoins, cette atteinte \u00e9tait admissible d\u00e8s lors\u00a0qu\u2019elle \u00e9tait bien :<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u2010\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0proportionn\u00e9e\u00a0: l\u2019employeur se limitait \u00e0 verser la publication litigieuse extraite du compte Facebook ainsi que le profil de certains de ses \u00ab\u00a0amis\u00a0\u00bb travaillant dans des entreprises concurrentes, sans verser d\u2019\u00e9l\u00e9ments priv\u00e9s superflus\u00a0;<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u2010\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0indispensable\u00a0: la production de la publication servait \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense de l\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat l\u00e9gitime de l\u2019employeur tenant \u00e0 la confidentialit\u00e9 de ses affaires.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.courdecassation.fr\/jurisprudence_2\/chambre_sociale_576\/779_30_45529.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.courdecassation.fr\/jurisprudence_2\/chambre_sociale_576\/779_30_45529.html<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Dans un arr\u00eat du 30 septembre promis \u00e0 la plus large publication, la Cour de cassation juge qu\u2019un \u00e9l\u00e9ment extrait du compte Facebook priv\u00e9 d\u2019un salari\u00e9 est une preuve recevable au soutien de son licenciement (Cass. soc., 30 septembre 2020, n\u00b0 19-12.058).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":19410,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_seopress_robots_follow":"","_seopress_robots_imageindex":"","_seopress_robots_snippet":"","_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_robots_breadcrumbs":"","_seopress_robots_freeze_modified_date":"","_seopress_robots_custom_modified_date":"","_seopress_robots_canonical":"","_seopress_social_fb_title":"","_seopress_social_fb_desc":"","_seopress_social_fb_img":"","_seopress_social_fb_img_attachment_id":0,"_seopress_social_fb_img_width":0,"_seopress_social_fb_img_height":0,"_seopress_social_twitter_title":"","_seopress_social_twitter_desc":"","_seopress_social_twitter_img":"","_seopress_social_twitter_img_attachment_id":0,"_seopress_social_twitter_img_width":0,"_seopress_social_twitter_img_height":0,"_seopress_redirections_value":"","_seopress_redirections_enabled":"","_seopress_redirections_enabled_regex":"","_seopress_redirections_logged_status":"","_seopress_redirections_param":"","_seopress_redirections_type":0,"_seopress_analysis_target_kw":"","_seopress_news_disabled":"","_seopress_video_disabled":"","_seopress_video":[],"_seopress_pro_schemas_manual":[],"_seopress_pro_rich_snippets_disable_all":"","_seopress_pro_rich_snippets_disable":[],"_seopress_pro_schemas":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[31],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19412","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-actualites-en-droit-social"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19412","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19412"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19412\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/19410"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19412"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19412"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19412"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}