Description
On 25 January 2023, the French Cour de Cassation(Chambre Sociale) annulled a decision by the Lyon Court of Appeal because it found the lower court had misapplied the legal test for determining a subordinate relationship.
The appeal court focused on the driver's freedom when not connected to the app, whereas the Cour de Cassation ruled that the correct approach is to examine the conditions that exist while the driver is performing the work through the platform.
The Cour de Cassation's role is not to re-examine the facts of a case, but to determine if the lower courts correctly applied the law. In its ruling, it concluded that the Lyon Court of Appeal had made a legal error by wrongly dismissing several key indicators that pointed towards a subordinate relationship between the driver and Uber.
The Cour de Cassation instructed that the focus should be on the conditions under which the service is actually performed. It highlighted several points the appeal court had failed to properly consider as evidence of a subordinate relationship:
-
Integration into an organised service: When a driver connects to the platform, they do not act as an independent partner but rather "integrate into a transport service created and entirely organised" by Uber. The driver has no personal clientele; the clients belong to the platform.
-
Control Over the Service: Uber exercises control over how the service is performed. It gives the driver an itinerary that the driver is expected to follow. The fare for the ride is contractually fixed by Uber's algorithm, with the driver having no ability to change it. The driver is unaware of the passenger's destination before accepting the ride, which limits his freedom to choose his jobs.
-
Power of Sanction: The court identified a clear power of direction and sanction. Uber can impose corrective measures, such as temporarily disconnecting a driver for having a high cancellation rate or for receiving poor customer ratings, which can lead to a permanent loss of access to the account. The court viewed this not as the simple termination of a commercial contract but as the exercise of disciplinary power, a key feature of an employer.
Because the appeal court had dismissed these indicators, the Cour de Cassation annulled its decision and sent the case to the Court of Appeal of Grenoble to be judged again based on this correct legal interpretation.
- Keywords
-
platform characteristics and business model,
algorithmic management,
employment status
- Actors
-
Platform,
Individual worker,
Court
- Sector
-
Transportation and storage
- Platforms
-
Uber
-
On 15 January 2021, the Lyon Court of Appeal upheld a first Instance ruling by the Lyon Labour Court delivered on 8 March 2019 according to which the relationship between …
France
