{"id":23898,"date":"2023-11-21T09:01:52","date_gmt":"2023-11-21T08:01:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/?p=23898"},"modified":"2023-11-21T09:01:54","modified_gmt":"2023-11-21T08:01:54","slug":"erreur-sur-le-destinataire-de-la-lettre-dobservations-ou-ladresse-a-laquelle-elle-est-adressee-vices-de-forme-de-nature-a-entrainer-la-nullite-du-redressement-selon-la-cour-d","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/erreur-sur-le-destinataire-de-la-lettre-dobservations-ou-ladresse-a-laquelle-elle-est-adressee-vices-de-forme-de-nature-a-entrainer-la-nullite-du-redressement-selon-la-cour-d\/","title":{"rendered":"Erreur sur le destinataire de la lettre d\u2019observations ou l\u2019adresse \u00e0 laquelle elle est adress\u00e9e : vices de forme de nature \u00e0 entra\u00eener la nullit\u00e9 du redressement selon la Cour d\u2019appel de Versailles"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">Aux termes d\u2019un arr\u00eat du 9 novembre 2023, la Cour d\u2019appel de Versailles a annul\u00e9 un redressement notifi\u00e9 par l\u2019URSSAF ainsi que la mise en demeure subs\u00e9quente au motif que la lettre d\u2019observations n\u2019avait pas \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement notifi\u00e9e \u00e0 la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 contr\u00f4l\u00e9e.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u00a0<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">En application des dispositions de l\u2019article R.243-59 du Code de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale, \u00e0 l\u2019issue du contr\u00f4le, les agents charg\u00e9s du contr\u00f4le communiquent \u00e0 l\u2019employeur ou au travailleur ind\u00e9pendant, leurs observations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u00a0<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">La communication de la lettre d\u2019observations constitue une formalit\u00e9 substantielle dont l\u2019omission entra\u00eene la nullit\u00e9 des op\u00e9rations de contr\u00f4le et de redressement (Cass. soc. 12 d\u00e9cembre 1996, n\u00b095-12.881\u00a0; Cass. soc. 6 f\u00e9vrier 1997, n\u00b095-13.685).<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u00a0<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">A l\u2019instar de l\u2019avis de contr\u00f4le, la lettre d\u2019observations doit \u00eatre adress\u00e9e \u00ab\u00a0<em>lorsque la personne contr\u00f4l\u00e9e est une personne morale [\u2026] \u00e0 l\u2019attention de son repr\u00e9sentant l\u00e9gal et envoy\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019adresse du si\u00e8ge social de l\u2019entreprise ou le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant \u00e0 celle de son \u00e9tablissement principal, telles que ces informations ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pr\u00e9alablement d\u00e9clar\u00e9es<\/em>\u00a0\u00bb (article R.243-59 du Code de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale).<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u00a0<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">En l\u2019esp\u00e8ce, la Cour d\u2019appel de Versailles a retenu, en particulier, que\u00a0:<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u00a0<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li class=\"ql-align-justify\">l\u2019URSSAF avait adress\u00e9 la lettre d\u2019observations \u00e0 la\u00a0Soci\u00e9t\u00e9, mais \u00e0 une ancienne adresse, le courrier ayant \u00e9t\u00e9 envoy\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019adresse de l\u2019ancien si\u00e8ge social de la Soci\u00e9t\u00e9\u00a0;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li class=\"ql-align-justify\">l\u2019URSSAF avait envoy\u00e9 la lettre d\u2019observations \u00e0 la nouvelle adresse du si\u00e8ge social de la Soci\u00e9t\u00e9, mais sans mention du nom de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 contr\u00f4l\u00e9e, le destinataire du courrier \u00e9tant une autre soci\u00e9t\u00e9 du groupe.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">L\u2019URSSAF a tent\u00e9 de faire valoir que l\u2019adresse lui avait \u00e9t\u00e9 communiqu\u00e9e par la personne qui \u00e9tait son interlocuteur lors du contr\u00f4le.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u00a0<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">Cet argument a, cependant, \u00e9t\u00e9 rejet\u00e9 par la Cour d\u2019appel qui a retenu que seule l\u2019adresse du si\u00e8ge social avait \u00e9t\u00e9 demand\u00e9e par l\u2019URSSAF et qu\u2019il lui appartenait de mentionner le nom de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 contr\u00f4l\u00e9e qui n\u2019avait pas encore \u00e9t\u00e9 dissoute lors de la p\u00e9riode contradictoire, en sus de l\u2019adresse postale, conform\u00e9ment aux dispositions de l\u2019article R.243-59 III susvis\u00e9.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u00a0<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">La Cour en a conclu que la lettre d\u2019observations n\u2019avait pas \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement notifi\u00e9e \u00e0 la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 contr\u00f4l\u00e9e, ce qui \u00e9tait de nature \u00e0 entra\u00eener la nullit\u00e9 du redressement.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u00a0<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">Adoptant une interpr\u00e9tation litt\u00e9rale des dispositions de l\u2019article R.243-59 du Code de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale pr\u00e9cit\u00e9, la Cour retient que la lettre d\u2019observations doit \u00eatre adress\u00e9e \u00e0 l\u2019adresse du si\u00e8ge social de la Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 et viser express\u00e9ment comme destinataire de ce courrier la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 contr\u00f4l\u00e9e, la mention d\u2019une autre soci\u00e9t\u00e9 appartenant au m\u00eame groupe constituant un vice de forme.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\">\u00a0<\/p>\n<p class=\"ql-align-justify\"><em>Versailles, 9 novembre 2023, n\u00b022\/01450<\/em><\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Aux termes d\u2019un arr\u00eat du 9 novembre 2023, la Cour d\u2019appel de Versailles a annul\u00e9 un redressement notifi\u00e9 par l\u2019URSSAF ainsi que la mise en demeure subs\u00e9quente au motif que la lettre d\u2019observations n\u2019avait pas \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement notifi\u00e9e \u00e0 la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 contr\u00f4l\u00e9e. \u00a0 En application des dispositions de l\u2019article R.243-59 du Code de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":23896,"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-23898","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\/23898","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=23898"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23898\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/23896"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23898"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23898"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23898"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}