Accueil / Blog CHHUM AVOCATS

French labour law - Internal Investigations: Analysis of the proposed law to establish a legal framework for internal investigations and a review of relevant case law. Employees, managers, senior executives -

Proposed law no. 2208 was registered with the President of the National Assembly on December 9, 2025, and draws on the work conducted by the "Internal Investigations" committee of the think tank Le Club des Juristes, with its report "Promoting Internal Investigations in France: A Lever for Competitiveness and Judicial Sovereignty," dated June 2025, as well as on the reflections initiated by Member of Parliament Olivier Marleix.

It was introduced by Christelle Minard, a member of the Les Républicains party.

The objective is to address the lack of a unified legal framework and to combat legal uncertainty, both for companies that conduct these investigations and for employees who participate in or are involved in them.

The explanatory memorandum also invokes the need to equip French companies – particularly those in strategic sectors such as defense, energy, and infrastructure – with the legal tools to protect themselves against external influences. Indeed, it is argued that the development and regulation of internal investigations would secure sensitive information while simultaneously affirming the State's legal sovereignty.

The proposed law thus aims to enshrine the fundamental principles governing the conduct of internal investigations: legal definition, respect for the rights of those involved, minimum procedural safeguards, the role of lawyers, confidentiality, and coordination with legal proceedings.

In labor law, employers have considerable freedom regarding internal investigations.

This must change, as internal investigations are often used against employees and to protect sometimes questionable management practices. A codification of internal investigations, incorporating case law, is welcome.

I) Review of case law on internal investigations and recommendations of the Defender of Rights.

In the event of a complaint, particularly for harassment or discrimination, companies conduct an investigation to verify the facts alleged by employees and thus consider possible disciplinary measures against the alleged perpetrator, even in the absence of legal proceedings.

It is imperative that the internal investigation adhere to certain fundamental principles: impartiality, confidentiality, and fairness [1].

Failure to comply with this obligation constitutes a breach of the obligation to prevent occupational risks [2].

In a ruling dated January 14, 2026 (24-19.544) published in the official bulletin, the Court of Cassation affirmed that no provision of the Labor Code requires employers to conduct an internal investigation in the event of a report of sexual harassment and that it was therefore up to the employer to assess the value and scope of the interviews and statements provided.

The Court of Cassation reiterated that in labor court matters, evidence is freely admissible.

The Court of Appeal's ruling must therefore be overturned. In finding that a dismissal was unjustified, the Court of Appeal held that, in the absence of an internal investigation capable of corroborating the employee's claims of sexual harassment cited in support of the dismissal, the materiality of these claims was insufficiently established.

This case law could be modified if the proposed law were passed by the legislature.

A. What about the right to a fair hearing?

The Court of Cassation addressed this issue in a ruling of March 17, 2021 (No. 18-25.597), indicating that an internal investigation conducted following a report of workplace harassment is not subject to the provisions of Article L. 1224-4 of the French Labor Code, which stipulates that no information concerning an employee personally may be collected by a device that has not been previously disclosed to them. The Court of Cassation added that an internal investigation does not constitute unfair evidence obtained through clandestine surveillance of an employee's activity.

Furthermore, in a ruling dated June 29, 2022 (no. 20-22.220), the Court of Cassation affirmed that an internal investigation initiated following a report of workplace harassment does not require the employer to interview the accused employee or grant them access to the file.

B. Admissibility of the investigation as evidence.

In a second ruling dated June 29, 2022 (no. 21-11.437), the Court of Cassation clarified, while reiterating that evidence is freely admissible in labor court proceedings, that the results of an internal investigation are admissible as evidence before the courts, provided that the investigations were conducted lawfully and that other evidence corroborates the report. C. Time limit for initiating an investigation.

In a decision dated March 23, 2022 (no. 20-23.272), the Court of Cassation established a principle according to which the employer is obligated to conduct an internal investigation promptly after a report. A delayed initiation of the investigation constitutes a breach of the employer's duty of care.

 

D. GDPR and internal investigations: employee's right of access to data (French Council of State, December 1, 2025, no. 498023).

In a judgment of 1 December 2025 (498023), the Council of State affirms that it follows from the above that the fact that personal data relating to an employee are being processed by his employer in the context of an internal investigation does not, in principle, prevent the employee from exercising his right of access to this data, unless the employer demonstrates that the request is manifestly unfounded or excessive or that the methods of exercising this right infringe on the rights and freedoms of others.

Thus, in finding that TotalEnergies SE had breached Article 15 of the GDPR by refusing access requests, when it was only required, in the circumstances of the case, in the absence of a manifestly unfounded or excessive request, to redact information likely to infringe on the rights and freedoms of others, the President of the CNIL did not disregard the provisions cited in point 10. The Council of State clarifies that the President of the CNIL also noted a breach by the company, with regard to one of the requests submitted to it, of Article 12(3) of the GDPR, according to which the controller must provide the data subject, in principle within one month of receiving the request, with information on the measures taken in response to a request made pursuant to Articles 15 to 22 of the GDPR. GDPR, on the grounds that it had not complied with this deadline for a request submitted to it on May 6, 2020. However, to contest the existence of this breach, the applicant company merely invokes the provisions of the order of March 25, 2020, concerning the extension of deadlines that expired during the health emergency period and the adaptation of procedures during this period, which cannot be applied to the deadlines in question, as stipulated by the GDPR.

TotalEnergies SE is not entitled to request the annulment of the CNIL President's decision that it is challenging.

E. Ensuring the proper conduct of internal investigations: recommendations from the Defender of Rights.

In a framework decision of February 5, 2025, Claire Hédon, the Defender of Rights, formulated 49 recommendations regarding internal investigations.

1. Accessibility of the reporting mechanism.

Within the company, several channels must be available (email, telephone, online chat) to ensure that all employees have access to reporting mechanisms.

Anonymity must not be a reason for systematically excluding employees from reporting.

2. Protection of those making reports.

The employer must implement preventative measures, including ensuring the prompt transmission of the occupational physician's contact information to alleged victims, witnesses, and those implicated.

Protection also means removing the employee in question from the workplace as soon as the investigation begins and guaranteeing strict confidentiality of the information gathered.

3. Conduct of the investigation.

The internal investigation must be initiated within a maximum of two months, without waiting for any potential legal proceedings.

It must result in a detailed report, and a summary must be provided to the alleged victim.

Pour lire l’intégralité de la brève, cliquez sur le lien ci-dessous

https://www.village-justice.com/articles/enquetes-internes-proposition-loi-2208-decembre-2025-visant-donner-cadre,55868.html?utm_source=backend&utm_medium=RSS_Linkedin&utm_campaign=RSS_Reseaux

 

Bibliographie :

I- Proposition de loi n°2208 visant à donner un cadre législatif aux enquêtes internes :

  • Proposition de loi n°2208 : Proposition de loi, n° 2208 - 17e législature - Assemblée nationale.
  • Promouvoir les enquêtes internes en France, Groupe de travail présidé par Dominique PERBEN, Le club des juristes.

II- Rappel de la jurisprudence sur les enquêtes internes :

Frédéric CHHUM avocat et ancien membre du conseil de l’ordre des avocats de Paris (mandat 2019-2021)

CHHUM AVOCATS (Paris, Nantes, Lille)

e-mail: chhum@chhum-avocats.com

www.chhum-avocats.fr

https://www.instagram.com/fredericchhum/?hl=fr

.Paris: 34 rue Petrelle 75009 Paris tel: 0142560300

.Nantes: 41, Quai de la Fosse 44000 Nantes tel: 0228442644

.Lille: : 45, Rue Saint Etienne 59000 Lille – Ligne directe +(33) 03.20.57.53.24

                            

 

 

Commentaires

Rédigez votre commentaire :

<% errorMessage %>
<% commentsCtrl.successMessage %>
<% commentsCtrl.errorMessage %>

Les réactions des internautes

a réagi le

<% comment.content %>

  • a réagi le

    <% subcomment.content %>

Répondre à ce fil de discussion
<% errorMessage %>
Aucun commentaire n'a été déposé, soyez le premier à commenter !