OD FLASH | the court of cassation specifies the documents to be provided to the accountant in the event of exercising the right to alert

Cour de cassation, civile, Chambre sociale, 21 janvier 2026, 24-17.478, Inédit – Légifrance

In this case, the work council of an economic and social unit (“unité économique et sociale” or UES”) exercised its right to raise an economic alert following concerns about the company’s financial situation. In this context, it appointed a certified public accountant (“expert-comptable”) to analyze the financial situation, the prospects for debt reduction, and the potential impact on employment.

Believing that it had not obtained all the documents necessary to carry out its mission, the expert referred the matter to the president of the judicial court in summary proceedings in order to have the existence of a manifestly unlawful disturbance (“trouble manifestement illicite”, one of the conditions allowing for urgent action) established and to obtain the compulsory disclosure of various documents, in particular those relating to a proposed asset sale and a comprehensive debt reduction plan for the group (in particular: the plan to sell all or part of the Company and open up its capital, as well as the Company’s debt reduction plan). However, the Court of Appeal found that some of the requests had become irrelevant and dismissed the remainder, considering that the requested documents existed only as drafts or working papers and that the offers received had not been accepted.

An appeal was then lodged by the certified public accountant and the committee.

The Supreme Court was therefore required to rule on the scope of the certified public accountant’s right of access to documents under the economic alert right and on the role of the judge in the event of a dispute.

It points out that, pursuant to Articles L. 2312-64, L. 2315-83, and L. 2315-93 of the Labor Code, the employer must provide the expert with the information necessary to carry out his mission and that it is up to the expert to determine which documents he considers useful. However, in the event of a dispute, it is up to the judge to assess the necessity of the information requested for the performance of the task.

In this case, the Court of Appeal had noted the absence of finalized documents establishing a defined strategy for the company. The Court of Appeal had considered that the companies comprising the economic and social unit were therefore not required to disclose the preparatory working documents (in particular the preliminary audit report prepared by the seller for potential investors making an attractive offer for the group) or the unsuccessful bids.

The Supreme Court approved the reasoning of the Court of Appeal and therefore dismissed the appeal by the work council and the accountant.