{"id":26648,"date":"2025-02-11T19:35:09","date_gmt":"2025-02-11T18:35:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/?p=26648"},"modified":"2025-02-11T19:35:11","modified_gmt":"2025-02-11T18:35:11","slug":"contestation-dexpertise-et-computation-du-delai-de-10-jours","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/contestation-dexpertise-et-computation-du-delai-de-10-jours\/","title":{"rendered":"Contestation d&rsquo;expertise et computation du d\u00e9lai de 10 jours"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">Pour la premi\u00e8re fois, \u00e0 notre connaissance, la Cour de cassation, dans un arr\u00eat du 5 f\u00e9vrier 2025, se prononce quant \u00e0 la computation du d\u00e9lai de 10 jours imparti \u00e0 l&#8217;employeur pour former une contestation d&rsquo;expertise d\u00e9cid\u00e9e par le comit\u00e9 social et \u00e9conomique conform\u00e9ment aux articles L. 2315-86 et R. 2315-49 du Code du travail (Cass. soc. 5 f\u00e9vr. 2025 n\u00b022-21.892).<\/span><\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">En application des articles 640, 641 et 642 du Code de proc\u00e9dure civile, le d\u00e9lai de 10 jours imparti \u00e0 l&#8217;employeur pour exercer l&rsquo;un des recours pr\u00e9vu \u00e0 l&rsquo;article L. 2315-86 du Code du travail <\/span><strong style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">court \u00e0 compter du lendemain <\/strong><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">de : <\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">la d\u00e9lib\u00e9ration recourant \u00e0 une expertise si l&#8217;employeur entend contester la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de celle ci,<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">la d\u00e9signation de l&rsquo;expert si l&#8217;employeur conteste le choix de l&rsquo;expert,<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">la notification \u00e0 l&#8217;employeur du cahier des charges et des informations pr\u00e9vues \u00e0 l&rsquo;article L. 2315-81-1 s&rsquo;il entend contester le co\u00fbt pr\u00e9visionnel, l&rsquo;\u00e9tendue ou la dur\u00e9e de l&rsquo;expertise, <\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">la notification \u00e0 l&#8217;employeur du co\u00fbt final de l&rsquo;expertise s&rsquo;il entend contester ce co\u00fbt.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">Si ce d\u00e9lai de 10 jours s&rsquo;ach\u00e8ve un samedi, un dimanche ou un jour f\u00e9ri\u00e9 ou ch\u00f4m\u00e9, <\/span><strong style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">il est prorog\u00e9 jusqu&rsquo;au premier jour ouvrable suivant<\/strong><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">Cette solution est logique :<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">les dispositions pr\u00e9vues aux articles 640 \u00e0 642 du Code de proc\u00e9dure civile sont relatives \u00e0 la computation des d\u00e9lais de proc\u00e9dure,<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">la Cour de cassation a d\u00e9j\u00e0 eu l&rsquo;occasion d&rsquo;appliquer ces r\u00e8gles de computation aux d\u00e9lais suivants : le d\u00e9lai de 5 jours entre la convocation et l&rsquo;entretien pr\u00e9alable \u00e0 un \u00e9ventuel licenciement (par exemple, Cass. soc., 10 juill. 2019, n\u00b0 18-11.528), au d\u00e9lai de 15 jours pour contester les \u00e9lections professionnelles (Cass. soc., 11 oct. 2017, n\u00b016-60.300) ou pour contester la d\u00e9signation d&rsquo;un d\u00e9l\u00e9gu\u00e9 syndical (Cass. soc., 29 oct. 2003, n\u00b002-60.705),<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">de surcro\u00eet, comme le rel\u00e8ve Mme SOMME, Conseill\u00e8re rapporteur, la Cour de cassation a d\u00e9j\u00e0 eu l&rsquo;occasion de juger \u00ab\u00a0<\/span><em style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">qu\u2019en cas de notifications successives du co\u00fbt pr\u00e9visionnel de l\u2019expertise, la seconde notification, par laquelle l\u2019expert avait notifi\u00e9 un nouveau co\u00fbt pr\u00e9visionnel, ouvrait droit \u00e0 un recours en contestation<\/em><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">\u00a0\u00bb de ce co\u00fbt lequel courait le lendemain de cette notification.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><\/p>\n<p> \ufeff<a href=\"https:\/\/www.courdecassation.fr\/en\/decision\/67a30971eaef5a22b443b39d?nextdecisionindex=1&#038;nextdecisionpage=2&#038;op=Rechercher&#038;page=2&#038;previousdecisionindex=9&#038;previousdecisionpage=1&#038;search_api_fulltext=\" target=\"_blank\">https:\/\/www.courdecassation.fr\/en\/decision\/67a30971eaef5a22b443b39d?nextdecisionindex=1&#038;nextdecisionpage=2&#038;op=Rechercher&#038;page=2&#038;previousdecisionindex=9&#038;previousdecisionpage=1&#038;search_api_fulltext=<\/a><\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Pour la premi\u00e8re fois, la Cour de cassation se prononce quant \u00e0 la computation du d\u00e9lai de 10 jours imparti \u00e0 l&#8217;employeur pour former une contestation d&rsquo;expertise d\u00e9cid\u00e9e par le Comit\u00e9 Social et Economique conform\u00e9ment aux articles L. 2315-86 et R. 2315-49 du Code du travail (Cass. soc. 5 f\u00e9vr. 2025 n\u00b022-21.892).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":26646,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[31],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-26648","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\/26648","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=26648"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26648\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":26651,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26648\/revisions\/26651"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/26646"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=26648"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=26648"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.voltaire-avocats.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=26648"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}