You hired your first employee in France from London, New York, Dubai or Singapore, and for months everything ran smoothly: the DPAE hiring declaration went through, pay slips came out of the payroll provider every month, and the DSN social declarations left on time. Then performance collapsed, trust broke down, or the French role simply became redundant — and you discover that ending an employment contract in France has almost nothing in common with firing at will back home. In France, dismissal is a formal legal procedure where a single missed deadline or a vague sentence in the dismissal letter can turn a clean separation into a labour court condemnation. The employee challenges the dismissal before the conseil de prud’hommes, the French labour court, and the judge examines your procedure line by line, from abroad if needed, because your former employee sues the French employing company in France.

This guide walks you, the foreign founder or foreign-based director of a French company, through the full dismissal of an employee on a CDI, the permanent open-ended contract that is the default form of employment in France. You will learn the mandatory steps of a dismissal for personal grounds, what the dismissal letter must contain and how to clarify it afterwards, exactly which sums you must pay even when the dismissal is flawless, what the labour court awards when it is not, and how to defend a case from abroad without flying to every hearing. Wherever a rule below comes from statute or case law, the exact text is quoted and linked to its official source, so your counsel can check every statement in one click.

I. How do you lawfully dismiss an employee in France when you manage the company from abroad?

A. What steps must you complete before and when you notify the dismissal?

French law treats dismissal as a decision that can only be taken after the employee has been heard. The starting point is a short provision that controls the entire timetable: article L. 1232-2 of the Labour Code states that “L’employeur qui envisage de licencier un salarié le convoque, avant toute décision, à un entretien préalable.” No dismissal for personal grounds — poor performance, misconduct short of serious fault, or unfitness — can lawfully skip this preliminary meeting. The summons itself must travel by registered letter or be handed over in person against a signed receipt, and it must state its purpose: “La convocation est effectuée par lettre recommandée ou par lettre remise en main propre contre décharge. Cette lettre indique l’objet de la convocation.” From abroad, the practical lesson is immediate: a simple email or a phone call telling the employee they are fired has no legal value as a dismissal, and it starts none of the protective deadlines. Send the summons by lettre recommandée avec avis de réception, the French registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt, ideally through your French counsel or payroll office so the posting date and receipt are provable in court.

The summons must then respect a waiting period that foreign employers constantly underestimate. The same article then sets the waiting period that foreign employers constantly underestimate: the meeting cannot be held until at least five full working days — jours ouvrables, meaning Monday to Saturday excluding public holidays — after presentation of the registered letter or hand delivery of the summons. France’s highest civil court polices this count strictly, and in a way that surprises employers: in a ruling of 6 September 2023, Court of Cassation, Social Chamber, appeal no. 22-11.661, the court recalled the five-working-day rule of article L. 1232-2 before quashing the appeal judges’ calculation. In that case the employer had sent the summons on 10 January for a meeting on 24 January, the employee only collected the letter on 22 January, and the court of appeal had declared the procedure irregular. The Court of Cassation quashed that reasoning, holding that “le délai de cinq jours avait commencé à courir le 13 janvier 2018, le jour suivant la présentation de la lettre recommandée” — the clock starts the day after the first presentation by the post office, not on collection. The employer won that point, but the lesson cuts both ways: count five full working days from the day after first presentation, exclude Sundays and holidays, and schedule the meeting with a safety margin rather than on the earliest possible date.

The summons letter must also tell the employee they do not have to come alone, and forgetting this notice is one of the most common — and most avoidable — procedural faults. Article L. 1232-4 of the Labour Code provides that “Lors de son audition, le salarié peut se faire assister par une personne de son choix appartenant au personnel de l’entreprise.” In the small French subsidiaries that foreign founders typically run, there are no staff representatives, and the Code has a dedicated answer for that situation: the employee may then be assisted either by a colleague or by a conseiller du salarié, an external employee adviser chosen from an official list drawn up by the administrative authority. The summons letter must mention this option. Your template should therefore always contain a sentence informing the employee of the right to be assisted and, where there are no employee representatives, of the right to bring an external adviser, with the address of the town hall or labour inspectorate where the list is available. Employee-side advisers check this sentence first when they prepare a prud’hommes claim, as the guide on preliminary-meeting summonses published by saisirprudhommes.com confirms: assistance rights and the content of the summons letter are the first things a claimant’s counsel attacks.

You do not have to conduct the meeting yourself from Paris, and you do not have to fly in for it. The president of a SAS, the French simplified joint-stock company most foreign founders use, or the gérant, the manager of a SARL, the French limited-liability company, may mandate a representative — typically a French lawyer, the local manager, or the external HR provider — with a clear written delegation to hear the employee, record their explanations and report back. What matters is that the person across the table has the authority to listen, that the employee’s explanations are genuinely heard and noted, and that no dismissal decision is communicated at the meeting itself. The decision comes later, in writing. If the employee does not attend, note their absence in writing and continue: a no-show does not block the procedure, but the file must show the meeting was genuinely offered.

Two frequent foreign-employer mistakes deserve a clear warning at this stage. First, confusing dismissal with its consensual alternative. The rupture conventionnelle, the mutual separation agreement subject to administrative approval, follows a different track with a 15-day withdrawal period and a validation request to the DREETS, the regional labour authority; it can never be imposed. The governing provision states that “La rupture conventionnelle, exclusive du licenciement ou de la démission, ne peut être imposée par l’une ou l’autre des parties” (article L. 1237-11 of the Labour Code). Pressuring an employee to “agree” to leave and then treating the refusal as a dismissal ground poisons both procedures at once. Second, using the personal-grounds timetable for an economic dismissal. When the real reason is the elimination of the position, financial difficulty or a reorganisation — for example closing the French sales role after a strategy change decided abroad — the notification cannot leave until seven full working days after the meeting for individual economic dismissals or small collective ones: article L. 1233-15 of the Labour Code requires notification “par lettre recommandée avec avis de réception” and forbids sending it “moins de sept jours ouvrables à compter de la date prévue de l’entretien”. An economic dismissal also triggers redeployment-search duties and, in companies with fewer than 1,000 employees, the offer of a contrat de sécurisation professionnelle, the publicly funded return-to-work scheme. Dressing an economic dismissal up as a personal one to go faster is the kind of reclassification labour judges sanction severely, so qualify the ground honestly before the procedure starts.

B. What must the dismissal letter contain, and can you still fix it afterwards?

The dismissal exists legally only through its notification letter, and the letter alone defines what you will be allowed to defend in court. Article L. 1232-6 of the Labour Code provides that “Lorsque l’employeur décide de licencier un salarié, il lui notifie sa décision par lettre recommandée avec avis de réception.” The same article adds two decisive sentences: “Cette lettre comporte l’énoncé du ou des motifs invoqués par l’employeur.” and “Elle ne peut être expédiée moins de deux jours ouvrables après la date prévue de l’entretien préalable au licenciement auquel le salarié a été convoqué.” Three practical consequences follow. First, the letter must state the precise facts you rely on — dates, figures, incidents, failed objectives with their reference period — not a general complaint about attitude or performance. The Ministry of Labour publishes official model letters, and the article itself notes that “Un arrêté du ministre chargé du travail fixe les modèles que l’employeur peut utiliser”, so start from those models rather than from a home-country template. Second, the two-working-day cooling period after the meeting is mandatory; posting the letter the evening of the meeting voids the timetable. Third, only the person with authority to dismiss — the legal representative or a duly empowered delegate — should sign, because the signature line is routinely checked in litigation.

The letter’s content does more than inform the employee: it draws the boundaries of the future trial. Article L. 1235-2 of the Labour Code provides that “La lettre de licenciement, précisée le cas échéant par l’employeur, fixe les limites du litige en ce qui concerne les motifs de licenciement.” In plain terms, the judge will only examine the grounds written in the letter, as clarified if needed — facts you forgot to mention cannot be added for the first time before the court. But the same article offers a safety valve that foreign employers should use systematically: after notification, the grounds stated in the letter may be clarified by the employer, either on the employer’s own initiative or at the employee’s request, within the time limits set by regulation. If the employee asks for clarification, you must answer within the set deadline; if you spot a vagueness yourself, send a clarification letter promptly rather than hoping the judge will guess what you meant. A vague letter that is never clarified is routinely held to be a dismissal without real and serious cause — cause réelle et sérieuse, the legal standard every French dismissal must meet — while a promptly clarified letter can still be defended on its merits.

II. How much does a French dismissal cost, and how do you defeat a labour court claim?

A. What severance, notice pay and accrued leave do you owe even when the dismissal is flawless?

Even a perfectly conducted dismissal costs money, and the bill has four lines: statutory severance, notice worked or paid, accrued paid leave, and the end-of-contract documents that condition unemployment benefits. Budget them before you start, because offering them spontaneously is always cheaper than having the labour court order them with interest. The first line is the indemnité de licenciement, the statutory severance. Article L. 1234-9 of the Labour Code grants it to “Le salarié titulaire d’un contrat de travail à durée indéterminée, licencié alors qu’il compte 8 mois d’ancienneté ininterrompus au service du même employeur”, adding “sauf en cas de faute grave” — no severance for serious misconduct, but severance in every other case once eight months of service are reached. Collective agreements and individual contracts frequently provide more, so the statutory amount is a floor: always compare it with the conventional severance before paying.

The statutory floor is computed with two regulatory provisions you can apply yourself. Article R. 1234-1 of the Labour Code states that “L’indemnité de licenciement prévue à l’article L. 1234-9 ne peut être inférieure à une somme calculée par année de service dans l’entreprise et tenant compte des mois de service accomplis au-delà des années pleines.” — partial years count pro rata by complete months. The rate comes from article R. 1234-2: “Un quart de mois de salaire par année d’ancienneté pour les années jusqu’à dix ans” and “Un tiers de mois de salaire par année d’ancienneté pour les années à partir de dix ans.” The reference salary itself is defined by article R. 1234-4 as “selon la formule la plus avantageuse pour le salarié”: either “la moyenne mensuelle des douze derniers mois précédant le licenciement” or “le tiers des trois derniers mois”, with annual bonuses counted only pro rata in the second formula. Take a concrete example: an employee with five years of service and a reference salary of 4,000 euros gross receives at least 5,000 euros (5 × one quarter of a month); with twelve years, the minimum is 10,000 euros for the first ten years plus two thirds of a month for years eleven and twelve. Run both salary formulas every time — the three-month average often wins when recent bonuses or commissions were high, and underpaying by a few hundred euros is an invitation to litigation that costs far more.

The second line is the préavis, the notice period, during which the contract continues and salary remains due. Its length comes from the contract or the applicable collective agreement — commonly one to three months depending on seniority and status — and the default rule when the employee does not work it is payment: article L. 1234-5 of the Labour Code provides that “Lorsque le salarié n’exécute pas le préavis, il a droit, sauf s’il a commis une faute grave, à une indemnité compensatrice.” This compensatory allowance “se cumule avec l’indemnité de licenciement”, so notice and severance stack. There is one major exception that traps foreign employers managing sick employees from afar: dismissal for unfitness of non-occupational origin. Article L. 1226-4 of the Labour Code requires that when the declared-unfit employee “n’est pas reclassé dans l’entreprise ou s’il n’est pas licencié, l’employeur lui verse, dès l’expiration de ce délai, le salaire correspondant à l’emploi que celui-ci occupait avant la suspension de son contrat de travail” once one month has passed since the return-to-work medical examination. And the Court of Cassation has closed the parallel debate on notice pay: in a ruling of 5 July 2023, Court of Cassation, Social Chamber, appeal no. 21-25.797, it held that “en cas de licenciement pour inaptitude consécutive à une maladie ou un accident non professionnel et impossibilité de reclassement, le préavis n’est pas exécuté, et cette inexécution ne donne pas lieu au versement d’une indemnité compensatrice.” So for non-occupational unfitness you owe no notice indemnity, but you may owe a full month’s salary if you were slow to reclassify or dismiss — act within the month following the medical opinion.

The third line is accrued paid leave. Article L. 3141-28 of the Labour Code provides for that conversion: when the contract ends before the employee has taken all the leave owed, the untaken fraction is paid out as a compensatory allowance, whichever side initiated the rupture. Every unused leave day at the end of the contract therefore converts to cash. The fourth line is paperwork, and it matters more than foreign directors expect: the solde de tout compte (final itemised pay statement), the certificat de travail (employment certificate) and the attestation France Travail (the certificate for the unemployment agency, formerly Pôle emploi) must be handed to the employee at the end of the contract. Without the attestation, the former employee cannot claim unemployment benefits and routinely asks the labour court for damages for the delay. Ask your payroll provider to prepare all three documents in parallel with the notice period so they are ready on the last day, and keep proof of delivery.

B. What does the labour court award when something goes wrong, and how do you fight back from abroad?

When the employee contests, the case goes to the conseil de prud’hommes of the place of work — Paris if your employee works in Paris — and the judge answers two questions in order: was the procedure regular, and was the cause real and serious? A purely procedural fault, without any flaw in the underlying reason, costs a capped indemnity: the Mango France ruling above illustrates the mechanism, with the Court of Cassation recording in its 6 September 2023 judgment “l’indemnité pour irrégularité de procédure de licenciement correspondant à un mois de salaire que la cour d’appel a fixé au montant non contesté de 2 098,77 euros.” One month’s salary is the ceiling for that head of damage when the dismissal itself is justified, which is why a five-day miscalculation or a missing assistance notice, while embarrassing, remains containable if the substantive file is strong. The picture changes completely when the cause itself fails. Article L. 1235-3 of the Labour Code provides that “Si le licenciement d’un salarié survient pour une cause qui n’est pas réelle et sérieuse, le juge peut proposer la réintégration du salarié dans l’entreprise, avec maintien de ses avantages acquis.” and that if either side refuses reinstatement — which, in practice, at least one side always does — “le juge octroie au salarié une indemnité à la charge de l’employeur, dont le montant est compris entre les montants minimaux et maximaux fixés dans le tableau ci-dessous.” That table is the barème Macron, the statutory scale: for example, an employee with two years of service brings a minimum of three months’ salary and a maximum of three and a half, while ten years of service open a range of three to ten months, with higher ceilings beyond. The scale applies unless the dismissal is void — nul — for violation of a fundamental protection such as discrimination, harassment, pregnancy or the breach of a protected status, in which case compensation is uncapped and the minimum is six months’ salary. Never let a file drift toward a void-dismissal allegation: an angry email referencing the employee’s health, age, origin or family situation can requalify the entire dispute and take it outside the scale.

Time works in the employer’s favour, but only if you count it. Article L. 1471-1 of the Labour Code provides that “Toute action portant sur la rupture du contrat de travail se prescrit par douze mois à compter de la notification de la rupture.” Twelve months from notification of the rupture, not from the last day of notice: a claim filed on the thirteenth month is time-barred, and raising the limitation defence early often ends the case at the first hearing. Docket the anniversary date as soon as the dismissal letter leaves, keep the proof of notification durably, and instruct counsel to check admissibility before arguing the merits. Conversely, do not read the twelve-month rule as a reason to ignore conciliation: prud’hommes proceedings begin with a conciliation hearing where a reasonable settlement — typically between the statutory floor and the lower half of the scale — closes the dispute in weeks instead of eighteen months, with no public judgment and no further claims. For a foreign group, the certainty of a settlement signed by counsel is frequently worth more than a slightly better judgment a year later.

Defending from abroad is routine and requires three arrangements. First, representation: you do not need to attend in person. A French employment lawyer represents the company with a written delegation, handles the mandatory conciliation and adjudication hearings, and reports after each stage; the employee’s own absence does not stop the case either, so proceedings move forward even across time zones. Second, evidence must be gathered to French standards: originals or certified copies of the summons, proof of presentation, meeting notes, the signed dismissal letter with its acknowledgment, pay slips, objective-setting documents, warning letters and performance reviews — translated where useful, but always complete, because the letter fixes the limits of the dispute and exhibits outside it carry little weight. Witness statements follow a strict formal template (attestation de témoin) with identity documents attached; a foreign manager’s informal email rarely qualifies. Third, protect the executives: in a SAS, the French entity is the defendant, not the overseas parent, and directors who kept the procedure clean face no personal exposure in the labour dispute itself. The broader lesson, developed in our guide on setting up a company in France as a foreign founder, is that choosing the right vehicle and keeping payroll, bank and registry matters in order from day one makes every later step — including a dismissal — dramatically simpler.

Conclusion

Dismissing an employee in France from abroad is entirely possible, but it rewards preparation and punishes improvisation. Start from the ground: qualify the reason honestly as personal or economic, send a registered summons that mentions assistance rights, wait five full working days, hold a genuine meeting through a mandated representative, then notify precise written grounds no earlier than two working days later. Clarify the letter as soon as a vagueness appears, because the letter alone will define the trial. Pay spontaneously what is due in any event — statutory severance from eight months of service, notice worked or compensated, accrued leave, and the three end-of-contract documents — and remember the inaptitude trap that suspends notice pay but restarts salary after one month. If the case reaches the labour court, the barème scale prices the risk, the twelve-month limitation may end it, and counsel on the ground can defend it without you crossing an ocean. Handled this way, a French dismissal becomes what it should be: a controlled cost, not a crisis.

Need a quick opinion on your case

Planning a dismissal in your French SAS, SARL or subsidiary, or already facing a prud’hommes claim from a former employee? Our firm offers a phone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer of the firm to review your procedure, your letter and your severance calculation. Call +33 6 46 60 58 22 or write via our contact page.