自杀行为和雇主不可原谅的过错

IF 0.1 Q4 MEDICINE, LEGAL
Sophie Joly (Maître de conférences à l’université de Montpellier)
{"title":"自杀行为和雇主不可原谅的过错","authors":"Sophie Joly (Maître de conférences à l’université de Montpellier)","doi":"10.1016/j.meddro.2021.02.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>When a suicidal act is attributed to work, in addition to the qualification of a work accident, the employer's inexcusable fault, based on his obligation of safety, can be retained if the latter was aware of the danger incurred by his subordinate and did not take the necessary measures to protect him. Two points stand out. On the one hand, the risk of suicide is not always predictable, which leads to a more general thinking on its prevention. On the other hand, since 2015, two conceptions regarding the obligation of security have coexisted, new in labour law and, constant in social security law, with litigation falling under two separate chambers of the High Court. Three judgments from October 8, issued by the second civil chamber of the High Court appear to be moving towards a harmonization of case law. Consequently, their scope should be assessed, in particular regarding the preventive measures expected from the employer.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":41275,"journal":{"name":"Medecine & Droit","volume":"2021 168","pages":"Pages 35-44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.meddro.2021.02.004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Le geste suicidaire et la faute inexcusable de l’employeur\",\"authors\":\"Sophie Joly (Maître de conférences à l’université de Montpellier)\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.meddro.2021.02.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>When a suicidal act is attributed to work, in addition to the qualification of a work accident, the employer's inexcusable fault, based on his obligation of safety, can be retained if the latter was aware of the danger incurred by his subordinate and did not take the necessary measures to protect him. Two points stand out. On the one hand, the risk of suicide is not always predictable, which leads to a more general thinking on its prevention. On the other hand, since 2015, two conceptions regarding the obligation of security have coexisted, new in labour law and, constant in social security law, with litigation falling under two separate chambers of the High Court. Three judgments from October 8, issued by the second civil chamber of the High Court appear to be moving towards a harmonization of case law. Consequently, their scope should be assessed, in particular regarding the preventive measures expected from the employer.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":41275,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medecine & Droit\",\"volume\":\"2021 168\",\"pages\":\"Pages 35-44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.meddro.2021.02.004\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medecine & Droit\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1246739121000245\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medecine & Droit","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1246739121000245","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当自杀行为被归因于工作时,除了工作事故的资格外,如果雇主意识到其下属所造成的危险而没有采取必要措施保护他,则雇主基于其安全义务的不可原谅的过失可以保留。有两点值得注意。一方面,自杀的风险并不总是可以预测的,这导致了对预防自杀的更普遍的思考。另一方面,自2015年以来,关于保障义务的两个概念并存,劳动法中新的概念和社会保障法中不变的概念,诉讼分属于高等法院的两个独立分庭。从10月8日起,高等法院第二民事分庭发布的三份判决似乎正朝着判例法的协调发展。因此,应评估其范围,特别是对雇主期望采取的预防措施进行评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Le geste suicidaire et la faute inexcusable de l’employeur

When a suicidal act is attributed to work, in addition to the qualification of a work accident, the employer's inexcusable fault, based on his obligation of safety, can be retained if the latter was aware of the danger incurred by his subordinate and did not take the necessary measures to protect him. Two points stand out. On the one hand, the risk of suicide is not always predictable, which leads to a more general thinking on its prevention. On the other hand, since 2015, two conceptions regarding the obligation of security have coexisted, new in labour law and, constant in social security law, with litigation falling under two separate chambers of the High Court. Three judgments from October 8, issued by the second civil chamber of the High Court appear to be moving towards a harmonization of case law. Consequently, their scope should be assessed, in particular regarding the preventive measures expected from the employer.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medecine & Droit
Medecine & Droit MEDICINE, LEGAL-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: The Scientific Committee of the journal Médecine et Droit includes professors of medicine, professors of law, magistrates, lawyers, court medical experts, and specialists in compensation for physical injury. Médecine et Droit provides: • rigorous and clear support for informative and educational matter • a tool for reflection and actualisation of knowledge • an essential link between doctors and lawyers. Médecine et Droit informs: • doctors on different aspects of law and regulations encountered in their profession • lawyers on the specific problems of the medical profession and important bio-ethical issues
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信