OD FLASH | Expiration of an occupational physician’s fixed-term contract: It is not always necessary to refer the matter to the labor inspector

Cour de cassation, Chambre sociale, 15 avril 2026, n° 23-22.437

In this case, an occupational physician was hired under a fixed-term contract, without a renewal clause, due to a temporary increase in workload. Having been relieved of her duties until the expiration of her contract, the termination of her contract upon its expiration was authorized by a decision of the labor inspector.

The employee filed a claim with the labor court seeking to have a preliminary question regarding the legality of the labor inspector’s decision referred to the administrative court. She also requested, pending the administrative court’s response, that her fixed-term contract be reclassified as a permanent contract, as well as payment of various forms of compensation.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the employee’s claims on the grounds that, since the request for a preliminary ruling had not been granted, her other claims—based solely on a future decision by the administrative court overturning the labor inspector’s decision—must be dismissed.

The Court of Cassation partially overturned the appellate court’s ruling. It held that since the entry into force of Law No. 2018-217 of March 29, 2018, the expiration of a fixed-term contract for an occupational physician, entered into due to a temporary increase in activity without a renewal clause, no longer requires referral to the labor inspector pursuant to Articles L. 4623-5-1 and L. 4623-5-2 of the Labor Code.

The Labor Chamber notes that, with regard to protected employees covered by Article L. 2421-8 of the Labor Code, the protection requiring referral to the labor inspector upon the expiration of a fixed-term contract without a renewal clause applies, since Law No. 2018-217, only to contracts entered into pursuant to Article L. 1242-2(3), namely so-called seasonal or customary contracts. Applying this reasoning to the occupational physician, as it had done in the past with regard to the employee’s representative (Cass., Soc., July 10, 2024, No. 22-21.856), the Court concluded that the labor inspector did not need to be consulted to authorize the termination of the contract upon its expiration. Consequently, it was incumbent upon the civil court to rule on the request to reclassify the fixed-term contract as a permanent contract, without being able to hide behind the rejection of the preliminary question to dismiss this request.