French Labour Law

CSE Elections in France: Breach of Gender Alternation on a Union List Does Not Void All Wrongly Ranked Candidates

DAIRIA Law · 2026-08-25 · 12 min

CSE Elections: The Limited Scope of Annulment for Failure to Alternate Women and Men on a Union List

A ruling handed down on 10 June 2025 (Cass. soc., 10 June 2025, No. 23-21.234) provides decisive clarification for employers and trade unions regarding the consequences of a defect affecting the composition of an electoral list for the social and economic committee (comité social et économique, or CSE — the French staff representation body). The French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) holds that a failure to comply with the alternation of women and men on a union list does not trigger a cascade annulment of all candidates ranked after the first wrongly positioned candidate, but only the annulment of that first irregularly designated candidate. This case law therefore rejects an expansive interpretation that would have led to the wholesale annulment of the ballot for a formal parity defect.

Article L. 2314-30 of the French Labour Code requires that lists of candidates submitted by trade unions be composed alternately of women and men, until the candidates of one sex are exhausted. This obligation is intended to guarantee balanced representation within the CSE, the central institution for social dialogue since the 2017 Macron ordinances.

The pre-electoral agreement (protocole d’accord préélectoral, or PAP — the collectively negotiated framework governing the elections) sets the contractual framework for this obligation. It defines the number of seats to be filled, the allocation of electoral colleges, and the arrangements for applying the representation rules. Where a trade union submits a list that does not comply with the principle of alternation, the question arises as to the extent of the defect affecting the designations.

The Attempt at Wholesale Annulment Based on a Formal Defect

In the case examined by the Supreme Court, a trade union had brought proceedings before the judicial court (tribunal judiciaire) seeking annulment of the ballot. It argued that a competing list had ranked a male candidate in third position while a female candidate already appeared in first position, in breach of the principle of strict alternation set out in the PAP.

The litigation strategy consisted in seeking the annulment of all candidates ranked from the third position onwards (the wrongly positioned candidate and everyone appearing after him on the list), on the grounds that the initial defect contaminated the entire subsequent sequence. This expansive approach could have led to the annulment of several elected representatives and significantly altered the final composition of the CSE.

The Supreme Court’s Rejection: The Limited Scope of a Composition Defect

The Social Chamber of the Supreme Court rejects this expansive interpretation. It holds that a defect affecting the composition of the list entails the annulment only of the first wrongly positioned candidate, without extending its effects to the subsequent candidates.

Ratio Decidendi: The Defect Does Not Contaminate the List as a Whole

The Court applies a two-stage reasoning:

First stage: identification of the formal defect. Failure to comply with the alternation of women and men constitutes an irregularity under the PAP and Article L. 2314-30 of the French Labour Code. The disputed list did indeed contravene the principle of alternation by ranking a male candidate after a female candidate, without observing the required sequencing.

Second stage: limitation of the effects of the annulment. The Court confines the effect of the defect to the wrongly positioned candidate alone (in this case, the third on the list). The subsequent candidates are not affected by the nullity, since their ranking is not directly contrary to the PAP. In other words, the irregularity does not entail a cascade nullity.

Case-Law Basis: No Statutory Provision Requiring Wholesale Annulment

The French Labour Code does not expressly provide that a defect affecting one candidate entails the annulment of all subsequent candidates. Article L. 2314-26 of the French Labour Code provides that the judicial court rules on all disputes relating to voter eligibility, the regularity of electoral operations, and the designation of union representatives to the committee. Article L. 2324-22-1 of the French Labour Code specifies that the judicial court alone has jurisdiction to hear disputes relating to elections.

In the absence of any provision requiring extended annulment, the Supreme Court adopts a strict interpretation: only the designation of the candidate directly contrary to the PAP is void. This position is in line with a body of case law favouring the stability of staff representation bodies and limiting electoral annulments to substantial irregularities only.

Practical Implications for Employers and HR Departments

Securing the Electoral Process and the Role of the PAP

The ruling of 10 June 2025 sheds light for HR directors and employers on the concrete scope of formal defects affecting union lists. Three operational lessons emerge:

1. Rigorous review of compliance with the PAP when lists are submitted

The employer must verify, ahead of the ballot, that each list scrupulously complies with the alternation of women and men provided for in the PAP. This verification is a procedural obligation, non-compliance with which may give rise to subsequent litigation. Management should document this review (sign-off on each list, an initialled verification note, email exchanges with the trade unions).

An employer who identifies an irregularity before the ballot must inform the trade union concerned, granting it a reasonable period to rectify the list. This period, generally set at 48 hours in practice, should appear in the PAP or be the subject of a method agreement annexed to the PAP.

2. Limiting the risk of wholesale annulment

The solution adopted by the Supreme Court reduces the risk of mass annulment of a union list’s elected representatives. Only the wrongly positioned candidate is set aside, which preserves the overall representativeness of the trade union and the stability of the CSE.

For the employer, this case law means that a formal defect affecting a competing list does not systematically justify the annulment of several seats. Contentious actions should therefore be calibrated accordingly, and the effects of an isolated composition defect should not be overestimated.

3. Evidentiary documentation in the event of litigation

In the event of a challenge after the ballot, the employer must be able to produce:

  • The PAP signed by all representative trade unions, including the women/men alternation clause;
  • The lists submitted by each trade union, dated and initialled;
  • The vote-counting report for the first round and, where applicable, the second round, stating the number of votes obtained by each candidate;
  • Written exchanges (emails, registered letters) relating to the verification of the lists’ compliance.

This documentation makes it possible to trace the compliance chain and to prove that the employer met its procedural obligations, without interfering in the trade unions’ choice of candidates.

Scope of the Case Law and Open Questions

Limited Annulment: A Principle Applicable to All Electoral Colleges?

The ruling of 10 June 2025 does not expressly state whether the principle limiting annulment to the wrongly positioned candidate alone applies equally to all electoral colleges (workers/employees, managers, supervisors). However, Article L. 2314-30 of the French Labour Code imposes alternation for all lists, regardless of the college. The ratio decidendi of the ruling therefore appears transposable to all colleges.

What About Annulment in the Event of a Substantial Defect Affecting the Ballot Itself?

The Supreme Court confines its solution to the defect in the composition of a list. It does not rule on situations where the ballot itself is affected by substantial irregularities (irregular postal voting, failure to guarantee the secrecy of the vote, pressure exerted on voters).

In such cases, settled case law requires annulment of the ballot as a whole where the irregularity may have altered the result (Cass. soc., 17 June 2015, No. 14-17.551). The ruling of 10 June 2025 does not call this solution into question.

Interaction with Regularisation During the Term of Office

Article L. 2314-37 of the French Labour Code governs the replacement of CSE members whose term of office ends before its normal expiry. If the first wrongly positioned candidate is annulled, the next candidate on the list (who was not elected) could in theory be declared elected as a replacement.

However, this mechanism assumes that the next candidate obtained enough votes to be elected. If the annulment of the irregular candidate does not change the number of seats obtained by the list, the seat becomes vacant and the rule of replacement by the next candidate on the same list applies (subject to compliance with the alternation of women and men).

Operational Recommendations for Managing CSE Elections

Comprehensive Formalisation of the Pre-Electoral Agreement

The PAP should set out unambiguously:

  • The number of seats to be filled per electoral college;
  • The allocation of full-member and alternate-member seats;
  • The practical arrangements for submitting lists (deadline, form, supporting documents);
  • The principle of alternation of women and men, specifying the sanction applicable in the event of non-compliance (annulment of the wrongly positioned candidate or annulment of the entire list);
  • The employer’s verification arrangements and the period granted to trade unions to rectify.

This formalisation avoids subsequent interpretive disputes and makes it possible to prove that the employer complied with its duty of good faith in the electoral process.

Durable Evidentiary Archiving

All documents relating to the electoral process (PAP, submitted lists, reports, correspondence) must be archived throughout the entire term of office of the CSE (four years pursuant to Article L. 2314-33 of the French Labour Code), extended by the limitation period for annulment actions (five years from the announcement of the results, according to settled case law).

In practice, archiving should be maintained for nine years from the announcement of the results. This archiving may be electronic, provided the integrity and durability of the files are guaranteed (time-stamping, electronic signature, secure hosting).

Managing Litigation: An Appropriate Procedural Strategy

Where a trade union challenges the compliance of a competing list for failure to alternate, the employer should:

  • Precisely analyse the alleged defect (which candidate, which ranking, which rule breached);
  • Assess the actual impact on the composition of the CSE (number of seats potentially annulled, change in the majority within the CSE);
  • Assemble a complete evidentiary file (PAP, submitted lists, reports, correspondence);
  • If the defect is established, not seek to defend the indefensible: acknowledge the irregularity of the wrongly positioned candidate and request that the annulment be limited to that candidate alone, relying on the ruling of 10 June 2025;
  • If the defect is contestable, argue that there is no impact on the result of the ballot and that the principle of alternation was substantially complied with.

DAIRIA supports employers in structuring such disputes, providing rigorous procedural analysis and appearing before the judicial court to secure the compliance of electoral processes.

Interaction with Other Parity and Representation Rules

Obligation of Balanced Representation Within the Established CSE

Beyond the composition of the lists, Article L. 2314-30 of the French Labour Code also requires balanced representation within the established CSE. The elections must aim for a women/men distribution proportional to the distribution of each sex within the electoral colleges.

This obligation does not rest on the employer but on the trade unions when they draw up their lists. Nonetheless, the employer must take it into account in the formal verification of the submitted lists and in drafting the PAP.

Distinction from Balanced Representation on the Management Committee

Article L. 1142-8 of the French Labour Code requires, for companies with more than 1,000 employees, balanced representation of women and men within governing bodies. This obligation is distinct from the one applicable to the CSE and falls within a different normative scope.

HR directors must therefore be careful not to confuse these two regimes and must apply the rules specific to each institution.

Towards Harmonised Practices: The Role of Social Dialogue

The ruling of 10 June 2025 invites the social partners to clarify, in future PAPs, the precise consequences of a failure to alternate women and men. Three avenues for improvement emerge:

1. Pre-ballot rectification clause

The PAP may provide that, where a list-composition irregularity is detected, the trade union has a 48-hour period to rectify (removal of the irregular candidate, addition of a candidate of the required sex, reordering of the list). This clause should specify that, failing rectification, only the irregular candidate will be excluded from the ballot.

2. Clause on graduated consequences based on the seriousness of the defect

The PAP may distinguish between:

  • An isolated formal defect (one wrongly positioned candidate) → annulment of the irregular candidate alone;
  • A systematic substantial defect (an entire list failing to comply with alternation) → annulment of the list as a whole.

This gradation makes it possible to proportion the sanction to the seriousness of the breach and to preserve union representativeness where the defect is minor.

3. Mediation prior to litigation

The PAP may establish a mandatory mediation phase before any referral to the judicial court, entrusted to an external mediator (labour inspector, mediator appointed by the representative trade unions). This mediation makes it possible to settle minor challenges amicably and to relieve the burden of electoral litigation.

  • French Labour Code, Article L. 2314-26 (disputes relating to voter eligibility and the regularity of electoral operations)
  • French Labour Code, Article L. 2314-30 (alternating composition of candidate lists)
  • French Labour Code, Article L. 2314-33 (duration of the CSE term of office)
  • French Labour Code, Article L. 2314-37 (replacement of CSE members)
  • French Labour Code, Article L. 2324-22-1 (exclusive jurisdiction of the judicial court over electoral disputes)
  • French Labour Code, Article L. 1142-8 (balanced representation within governing bodies)
  • Cass. soc., 10 June 2025, No. 23-21.234 (limitation of annulment to the wrongly positioned candidate alone in the event of a failure to alternate women and men)
  • Cass. soc., 17 June 2015, No. 14-17.551 (annulment of the ballot in the event of a substantial irregularity altering the result)
← All insights