{"id":19909,"date":"2021-06-04T09:00:33","date_gmt":"2021-06-04T07:00:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/enquete-interne-comme-mode-de-preuve-de-la-faute-du-salarie-precisions-de-la-cour-de-cassation\/"},"modified":"2022-09-19T14:49:23","modified_gmt":"2022-09-19T12:49:23","slug":"enquete-interne-comme-mode-de-preuve-de-la-faute-du-salarie-precisions-de-la-cour-de-cassation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/enquete-interne-comme-mode-de-preuve-de-la-faute-du-salarie-precisions-de-la-cour-de-cassation\/","title":{"rendered":"Enqu\u00eate interne comme mode de preuve de la faute du salari\u00e9 : pr\u00e9cisions de la Cour de cassation"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Dans un arr\u00eat du 27 mai 2021, la Cour de cassation a jug\u00e9 que les enqu\u00eates internes r\u00e9alis\u00e9es \u00e0 la suite du signalement d\u2019anomalies de facturation par des clients et portant notamment sur les documents comptables de l\u2019entreprise pouvaient \u00eatre retenues comme \u00e9l\u00e9ments de preuve \u00e0 l\u2019appui d\u2019un licenciement pour faute grave.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>En l\u2019esp\u00e8ce, la protestation d&rsquo;un nouveau client sur un bon de commande et le signalement d&rsquo;anomalies de facturation par d\u2019autres salari\u00e9s avaient conduit l\u2019employeur \u00e0 diligenter une enqu\u00eate interne afin de d\u00e9terminer si ces anomalies pr\u00e9sentaient ou non un caract\u00e8re frauduleux. Cette enqu\u00eate avait r\u00e9v\u00e9l\u00e9 qu&rsquo;un salari\u00e9 exer\u00e7ant les fonctions de d\u00e9l\u00e9gu\u00e9 commercial compl\u00e9tait les bons de commande valid\u00e9s par les clients avec des mentions erron\u00e9es visant notamment \u00e0 sur\u00e9valuer le montant r\u00e9ellement command\u00e9 par le client, afin d&rsquo;atteindre plus facilement ses objectifs de vente et d&rsquo;accro\u00eetre sa r\u00e9mun\u00e9ration variable.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>Le salari\u00e9 faisait valoir que la Cour d\u2019appel, en retenant cette enqu\u00eate diligent\u00e9e par l\u2019employeur \u00e0 l\u2019insu du salari\u00e9 comme mode de preuve de la faute grave de celui-ci, avait \u00ab\u00a0<em>viol\u00e9 l&rsquo;article 6 \u00a7 1 de la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l&rsquo;homme et des libert\u00e9s fondamentales et le principe de loyaut\u00e9 dans l&rsquo;administration de la preuve<\/em>\u00a0\u00bb.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>La Haute juridiction a rejet\u00e9 ce moyen, soulignant que l\u2019enqu\u00eate men\u00e9e n\u2019avait pas pour objet de contr\u00f4ler sp\u00e9cifiquement l\u2019activit\u00e9 du salari\u00e9, de sorte qu\u2019elle n\u2019avait pas \u00e0 \u00eatre soumise \u00e0 l\u2019accord pr\u00e9alable de ce dernier.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><em>Cass. soc. 27 mai 2021, n\u00b019-23984<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Enqu\u00eate interne comme mode de preuve de la faute du salari\u00e9 : pr\u00e9cisions de la Cour de cassation<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":19907,"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-19909","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\/19909","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=19909"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19909\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/19907"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19909"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19909"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19909"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}