A trainee undergoing training, after being warned, was the subject of an exclusion decision by her school. It brought an action before the court for annulment and withdrawal from its educational file of the reports attesting to the lack of acquisition of the necessary skills and of the decisions taken against it. The applicant relied on the existence of a situation of psychological harassment.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s claims on the ground that the exclusion decision and the reports drawn up by the school were not vitiated by irregularities.

The Court of Cassation quashed and annulled the decision of the Court of Appeal on the ground that it had not examined the evidence relied on by the applicant concerning the existence of a case of psychological harassment.

The Court points out that the court is required to deal with the matters relied on by the applicant where his application concerns the recognition of a situation of psychological harassment.

If the evidence allows the existence of psychological harassment to be presumed, the defense must prove that the alleged conduct does not constitute such harassment. In the present case, the school had to demonstrate that its decisions and reports were justified by objective factors foreigner to any harassment.

The trainee is protected against psychological harassment in the same way as an employee.