In Seine-Saint-Denis, the psychiatrist attacks the hospital which continued to make him work after his retirement

See my news
Follow Paris News

The administrative court of Montreuil partially ruled in favor of a former psychiatrist of the hospital d'Aulnay-sous-Bois (Seine-Saint-Denis): the doctor was asked to reimburse nearly 23,000 euros in income for having continued to work “in good faith”, but “without authorization” beyond the legal retirement age.

The hospital should have informed him, says the doctor

The specialist considered that the Robert-Ballanger Intercommunal Hospital Center (CHI) had committed “an error” likely to incur liability by “not informing him” of the terms of his retirement.

He also considered that the National Management Center (CNG) of hospital practitioners should have “regularized” him when it removed him from the workforce. He had in fact “continued to practice in good faith” and his own “late presentation” of a request for extension of activity resulted from the “lack of information” from the hospital center.

“MX, tenured hospital practitioner […]reached the age limit for the exercise of his functions on November 4, 2020, recontextualizes the administrative court of Montreuil in a judgment of September 20, 2024, which has just been made public. However, beyond this date, he continued his activity within the hospital center while continuing to receive his full salary until March 2021.” On April 30, 2021, the hospital therefore requested the restitution of the 23,000 euros that he had earned “unduly” the last four months.

“Hospital practitioners who wish to benefit from an extension of activity must make a request to the CNG at least six months before the date,” provides the Public Health Code.

His “good faith” did not justify the granting of an extension

In this case, “if the applicant maintains without being disputed that he sent a request for extension of activity, this request, presented well after the date on which he had reached the age limit, was inadmissible in view of its latenessconsiders the court. It was up to the applicant, who could not ignore the date of cessation of his activity, to seek information himself on the procedure to follow to formulate a request for extension of activity if such was his wish. »

“The circumstance that he continued to exercise in good faith was not such as to justify the granting of an authorization to extend his activity retroactively,” add the judges.

MX is not justified in maintaining that CHI Robert-Ballanger disregarded the rule of service provided by asking him for reimbursement of the remuneration unduly received. It does not follow from any text that the administration is required to personally inform each agent of the rights and obligations arising from their status.

Shared wrongs and debt

“However, by allowing MX to continue to exercise his functions […] and by continuing the payment of his remuneration between November 2020 and March 2021, when no decision authorizing him to extend his activity had been taken, the administration also committed a fault,” considers the administrative court of Montreuil.

Under these conditions, the responsibilities were shared half and the psychiatrist will only have to reimburse 11,500 euros out of the 23,000 euros claimed from him. The hospital will also have to pay him an additional 1,500 euros for his legal costs.

Both parties have until Thursday, November 21, 2024 to appeal.

/ED (PressPepper)

Follow all the news from your favorite cities and media by subscribing to Mon Actu.