The Court of Cassation rendered a major decision on September 10, 2025. It forced companies to postpone paid leave not taken due to a sick leave, even if it occurs during the employee’s holidays. The only obligation of the latter relates to the fact of warning his employer.
France has so far been in contradiction with Europe
Until then, when an employee was on sick leave before the start of his holidays and he continued during the scheduled vacation period, the Labor Code provided for a postponement.
Concretely, the paid holidays which were to be taken and which ultimately coincide with the judgment were not lost. They could be used later, once the effective recovery of work.
But the situation differs when the disease occurred while the employee was already on vacation. In this case, the work stoppage did not allow, in principle, to postpone the remaining leave.
A French exception in contradiction with European Union law and national case law.
Leave with different objectives
Indeed, since 2012, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) says that an employee who falls ill during his holidays must have the possibility of postponing his days.
Because paid leave and sick leave pursue different objectives: the former target rest and leisure, while the latter allow health to be recovered.
This decision therefore comes in order to comply with French law with European legislation.
The decision caused contrasting reactions. On the side of trade union organizations, it is perceived as an advance for the rights of employees. On the other hand, employers’ organizations express concerns about the practical and financial implications of this measure.
Are we going towards an increase in work stoppages?
In a context of austerity and savings sought by the government, in particular due to the social security deficit, will this measure generate more work stoppages? Asked, Dr. Jean-Paul Hamon, general practitioner and honorary president of the Federation of Doctors of France, does not think so.
“The government is based on figures from 2013 to advance an increase in sick leave. But that has no meaning: on the one hand there have been more workers since that year and on the other hand, wages have increased. This means that work stoppages are necessarily more expensive to social security, when comparison is made.”
The doctor believes that we are wrong. “General practitioners are constantly accused of all evils. But instead of looking at work stoppages, we should rather observe the working conditions of employees: open-spaces that have increased the risk of musculoskeletal disorders and lumbar pain, occupational physicians who no longer move in businesses, employees who undergo several hours in transport … that is to remedy as a priority.”