CBD, THC, and driving: what the Court of Cassation actually ruled
Partager
What was the legal issue?
A driver argued that the THC found came from a legally marketed CBD product. The question was therefore whether the origin of the THC and the low authorized content in the product could prevent the qualification of driving after drug use.
In its ruling of June 21, 2023, the Court of Cassation stated that the authorization to market certain hemp-derived products containing a maximum of 0.3% THC has no impact on the offense, as soon as it is established that the driver used a substance classified as a narcotic.
What the ruling does not say
- It does not classify CBD itself as a narcotic.
- It does not mean that all CBD products systematically cause a positive result.
- It does not allow for the assertion that all cannabinoids or "derivatives" are detected in the same way.
- It does not turn the technical threshold of a test into a legally permitted level.
Why doesn't the THC level in the product protect the driver?
The 0.3% rule concerns the production or marketing conditions of certain hemp varieties and products. The Highway Code concerns the presence revealed by a saliva or blood analysis after use of a substance classified as a narcotic.
These are therefore two distinct frameworks: a product can be legally sold and yet expose its user to a positive THC result.
Detection threshold and incrimination threshold
The decree of December 13, 2016 sets the minimum THC detection threshold at 15 ng/mL for roadside saliva tests. This figure describes the sensitivity of the screening device. It does not constitute a threshold below which driving would be allowed.
After a positive screening, a confirmation analysis is carried out in a laboratory according to the legal procedure.
What sanctions apply in 2026?
Driving after drug use is punishable by up to three years in prison and a €9,000 fine, with a six-point license deduction. In case of combination with alcohol, penalties can reach five years in prison, a €15,000 fine, and nine points deducted.
Why this decision remains important
It requires the use of precise vocabulary. It is not the "CBD" nature of the product that is penalized, but the use of THC established by analysis. It also reminds that a screening threshold is not an authorization threshold and that the argument of the product's commercial legality is not enough to exclude the offense.
