Court overturns exclusion of nurse

One year after her exclusion from duties, Majdouline B. successfully challenged the decision in a ruling by the Paris administrative court on Tuesday, October 27. The court annulled the January 19, 2026 decree by which the Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) excluded her from her duties for eight months.

Legal costs awarded to nurse

The court also ordered the AP-HP to pay Majdouline B. 1,800 euros in legal costs. Majdouline B., appointed in March 2019, worked in the internal medicine department of Pitié-Salpêtrière. Her superiors reproached her for wearing a textile head covering continuously, a cap typically reserved for the operating room or intensive care.

Timeline of disciplinary actions

After a reprimand in May 2025 and repeated warnings, the management decided on her revocation on October 20, 2025, effective November 10. In early January, the emergency judge suspended this revocation, deeming it likely disproportionate and ordering her reinstatement.

Revised sanction and legal challenge

Thirteen days later, the AP-HP withdrew the sanction and replaced it with a temporary exclusion for eight months. The emergency judge was again approached in an urgent matter but this time refused to suspend the measure in February 2026, considering it not manifestly excessive given the state of the investigation.

Court annuls second sanction

The court, ruling on the merits after a hearing beginning in early October, has just annulled this second sanction. The AP-HP based its decision initially on Article 234 of its internal regulations and on the 2014 recommendations of the Committee for the Fight against Nosocomial Infections (CLIN).

Legal interpretation criticized

The court examined these and noted that neither the general recommendations nor the specific recommendations indicated that the wearing of a cap, which is not contested as a hospital accessory used in certain departments, would be prohibited. The general recommendations require that hair be tied back without prohibiting the wearing of head coverings.

Judges find legal error

The rules specific to certain procedures only state that a cap cannot replace a bonnet or a hood where these are required. The judges concluded that the AP-HP had made a legal error by misinterpreting Article 234 of the internal regulations and the CLIN recommendations.

Disciplinary aspect upheld

The court concedes that the management could have prohibited attire posing a risk of infectious exposure under its organizational power, but states that neither the challenged sanction nor the AP-HP's defense documents indicate that the cap worn by Majdouline would have been such a case. The second grievance, disobedience, is upheld.

Sanction deemed disproportionate

Even though the prohibition had no legal basis, the order given to her to remove the cap was not such as to seriously compromise a public interest. By repeatedly refusing to comply, notably after requests on February 10 and March 24, 2025, the nurse failed to recognize her hierarchical obedience duty, justifying the imposition of a disciplinary sanction.

Court orders career reinstatement

However, the judges ruled that the sanction was disproportionate, considering her seniority within the institution, the nature of the facts for which she is reproached, which do not in themselves harm the interest of the service, and in the absence of contestation of her professional skills. Since the nurse has already resumed work, the court does not order her reinstatement but reminds the AP-HP that the annulment necessarily implies that her career be reinstated from January 19, 2026.

Unresolved constitutional and discrimination issues

The judges have not ruled on the constitutional question raised by the plaintiff or on the discrimination invoked by the unions. The AP-HP announced on Wednesday, October 28, that it would appeal to the Paris administrative court of appeal.

AP-HP's appeal and secularism argument

It points out that the court recognized a fault justifying a sanction and highlights the discrepancy with the emergency order that had earlier in the year considered the measure proportional. The institution notes that the nurse, excluded from January 19, was reintegrated on September 27, 2026, on a new position.

New legal stance on head coverings

Moreover, the AP-HP now places the matter on the ground of secularism, stating that it does not accept the repeated wearing of head coverings by its staff when neither the location nor the nature of the activity requires it, outside of operating rooms and intensive care. Management always begins with dialogue and a reminder of the internal secularism guide before enforcing the rule in the face of persistent refusal. This argument was not included in the reasons for the annulled sanction, which was based on hygiene rules and the duty of obedience. It will be up to the appellate court to decide.