The administrative court’s decision fundamentally calls into question our collective relationship with imposed technologies. It could profoundly redefine several regulatory aspects: the legal obligations incumbent on operators of essential infrastructure, the criteria for assessing the health impacts of technologies deployed on a large scale, and the complaint mechanisms available to citizens.
From the Gazette of Emerging Realities
By Damien
April 6, 2025
The Lyon Administrative Court issued a landmark decision in February 2025, requiring Enedis to remove a Linky meter installed against a private individual’s wishes. This ruling marks a major turning point in the years-long standoff between some citizens and the French electricity grid manager. Pierre Cascina, a resident of the Loire region, won his case after demonstrating a significant deterioration in his health following the forced installation of the communicating device in 2022.
The right of refusal recognized by the courts in the face of smart meters
The Cascina case represents a significant legal precedent in smart meter litigation. The Lyon judges granted unprecedented legitimacy to the subjective suffering of the plaintiff, who reported persistent migraines and sleep disturbances since the Linky system was installed in his home. This judicial recognition is based on the precautionary principle, despite the absence of a definitive scientific consensus on the health effects of the emitted waves.
The ruling seriously undermines Enedis’s policy, which until now relied on the regulatory compliance of its equipment to systematically reject any dispute. “This decision opens a significant breach in the electricity distributor’s strategy,” analyzes Jeanne Duvernet, an environmental law specialist. “From now on, the suffering experienced becomes an admissible argument in court, regardless of technical standards.”
Consumer advocacy groups welcome this legal breakthrough, which could benefit the approximately 1,200 similar cases currently being prepared. This unprecedented citizen mobilization is already forcing authorities to reconsider their regulatory approach to digital infrastructure imposed in private homes.
The Defender of Rights had also emphasized in its 2024 report that “the right to refuse must adapt to contemporary technological realities.” This prescient position is now finding concrete expression in the courts, redrawing the contours of technological consent.
Growing tension between energy transition and health protection
The emblematic case of Pierre Cascina perfectly illustrates the dilemma facing public policy: how to reconcile the essential modernization of electricity networks with the protection of populations potentially sensitive to electromagnetic radiation? An INSERM study published in January 2025 reveals that 67% of French people now demand greater protection against artificial waves in their daily environment.
While Enedis highlights the environmental benefits of smart meters, including a 30% reduction in CO₂ emissions linked to the optimization of electricity distribution, medical voices are raising the alarm about the potential risks. Dr. Fenech, a specialist in the health impacts of wireless technologies, has been discussing the “invisible accumulation” of radiation in modern homes since 2023.
Faced with this growing controversy, the government has scheduled a multidisciplinary audit for June 2025. This exceptional commission will bring together doctors, lawyers, and representatives of civil society with the mission of developing a more balanced regulatory framework capable of addressing health concerns without compromising the objectives of the energy transition.
The administrative court’s decision fundamentally calls into question our collective relationship with imposed technologies. It could profoundly redefine several regulatory aspects: the legal obligations incumbent on operators of essential infrastructure, the criteria for assessing the health impacts of technologies deployed on a large scale, and the complaint mechanisms available to citizens.
Outlook for the deployment of Linky meters
Despite this legal defeat, Enedis officially maintains its position regarding the compliance of its equipment. The company regularly reiterates that Linky meters strictly comply with European standards, with emissions limited to 30 V/m, compared to the 87 V/m permitted by current regulations.
However, internal sources reveal that management discreetly initiated a working group in January 2025 to seek technical alternatives for users who declare themselves electrosensitive. This pragmatic approach reflects a growing awareness of the health and legal issues raised by the mass deployment of smart meters.
The future of the Linky meter now appears to be moving toward a more flexible model, where individual consent could regain a central role. “It’s not about abandoning network modernization, but about inventing solutions tailored to individual circumstances,” explains Antoine Marchand, an energy policy expert.
This legal victory against Enedis marks the emergence of a new balance between technological progress and respect for individual freedoms. It underscores the importance of a constructive dialogue between citizen skepticism legitimized by the courts and ecological imperatives defended by institutions. This complex challenge will have to be addressed by future legislation on imposed technologies, as the digitalization of our daily environment intensifies.
Posted under Fair Use Rules.
Smart Meter Harm 