French Consumer Law is a comprehensive and comparative overview of French and EU law in this field, covering: advertising, unfair commercial practices, conditions for the validity of contracts, unfair terms, product conformity, latent defects, product safety.

French Consumer Law

Since the Law of 17 March 2014, the Consumer Code has contained a section on search and seizure operations and letters rogatory which may be applied in addition to the measures listed in Articles L. 512-5 et seq. (former Article L. 215-3), which is heavily influenced by the procedure used in competition law. Article L. 512-51 (formerly L. 215-18) provides that A and B category agents may, at the b …

Search and seizure operations

Prior to recodification, subject to Articles L. 215-18 and L. 215-19 respectively.

Since the Law of 17 March 2014, the Consumer Code has contained a section on search and seizure operations and letters rogatory which may be applied in addition to the measures listed in Articles L. 512-5 et seq. (former Article L. 215-3), which is heavily influenced by the procedure used in competition law. Article L. 512-51 (formerly L. 215-18) provides that A and B category agents may, at the behest of the Minister of the Economy, carry out search and seizure operations (raids) in all places. Each raid requires the authorization of the liberties and detention judge ("juge des libertés et de la détention") who must ensure that the application for the authorization (a warrant) is legitimate (Article L. 512-52). The search and seizure operation is carried out under the authority and control of the judge having issued the warrant, who can visit the premises in the course of the operation (Article L. 512-53). Unless there is a derogation order to that effect from the liberties and detention judge, raids may not commence either before 6 AM or after 9 PM. The search and seizure warrant is notified verbally and on site at the time of the operation to the occupant of the premises or to his representative, who receives full copy against a receipt or a note in the minutes, or in his absence, by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt (Article L. 512-58).

Unless an ordinance to the contrary to that effect has been issued by the liberties and detention judge, the raid  may not be initiated before 6 a.m. or after 9 p.m. The ordinance for search and seizure is notified verbally and on the spot at the time of the raid to the occupant of the premises or his representative, who receives a full copy against receipt or initials in the minutes, or in his absence, by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt (Art. L. 512-58). While search and seizure operations may begin in the absence of the legal counsel called, where such is the case, by the occupant of the premises or his representative, which implies that the presence of this counsel is not a condition for the legality of the operations, the fact remains that the occupant of the premises or his representative must be given the opportunity, before the start of the operations, to call on a lawyer and that, if this is not the case, this lack of assistance from a lawyer is likely to undermine the rights of defense of the person raided .

During the raid, the agents can seize any item, document and information medium useful to the needs of the investigation, take samples or place seals (Article L. 512-59) . They cannot, however, carry out large-scale, indiscriminate seizures .

They can also take verbal statements from the occupier of the premises or his/her representative or any person in order to obtain information or explanations relevant to the investigation (Article L. 512-60). The originals of the minutes and the inventory of items and documents seized, a copy of which is given to the occupant of the premises or his representative, are forwarded to the judge having authorized the raid. The conduct of search and seizure operations may be the subject of an appeal before the first president (presiding judge) of the Court of Appeal of the jurisdiction of the judge having authorized it. The order of the first president can be appealed in the Court of Cassation (Article L. 512-64). The Court of Cassation has ruled that, even though Article L. 512-64 of the Consumer Code provides for the right to appeal against the conduct of all search and seizure operations, it does not require that each of the acts concerned by the appeal be identified when the appeal is lodged, as long as the operations concerned by the appeal are identified .  On the other hand, it is for the raided undertaking, being in a position to establish whether or not the documents seized fall within the scope of the search warrant presented, to identify precisely the documents which it considers to be outside the scope of the investigation, so that they are not seized, or, if it has not done so, to obtain the annulment of the order. Whether or not the documents seized fall within the scope of the investigation is a matter for the sole discretion of the First President of the Court of Appeal. In this respect, documents and electronic media that are related to the subject of the investigation and are located in or accessible from the premises designated by the court may be seized, regardless of the fact that they concern persons not covered by the order .  Furthermore, the court cannot annul the seizure of e-mails stored on a USB stick on the grounds that they are covered by professional secrecy, when this fact has not been disclosed to the authorities, nor presented for open discussion by the parties. In addition, correspondence exchanged between a client and his or her lawyer, even if covered by professional secrecy, may be seized as part of the search operations, if it does not relate to the exercise of the client's rights of defense .

Lastly, the Court of Cassation considers that an order issued by the liberty and detention judge can validly authorize an inspection and seizure operation on items that have already been investigated and resulted in a settlement, when the two inspections do not concern the same commercial practices .

CA Paris, 2 October 2024, LawLex202400007381JBJ.

CA Limoges, 22 May 2024, LawLex202400003886JBJ, specifying that the provisions of Article L. 512-59 of the Consumer Code do not limit the authorization to seize documents belonging to or emanating from the persons targeted by the presumption of having engaged in a misleading commercial practice, but allow the seizure of all documents relating to fraudulent activities and thus of all documents of natural or legal persons in business relations with the company suspected of these activities, provided that they are considered useful, even if only partially, as evidence.

Cass. crim., 10 January 2023, LawLex202300001246JB

Cass. crim., 10 January 2023, LawLex202300001246JBJ, above.

Cass. crim., 10 January 2023, LawLex202300001246JBJ, specifying that the first president of the court of appeal cannot annul the seizure of e-mails exchanged between a client and his lawyer on the grounds that they are covered by “legal privilege”, since “legal privilege”, a concept which is not recognized in French law, encompasses exchanges unrelated to the exercise of the rights of defense in legal systems where it exists.

Cass. crim., 10 January 2023, LawLex202300001195JBJ.

French Consumer Law

18. Search and seizure operations(1)

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

18. Search and seizure operations.css-17rnqzd{cursor:pointer;margin-left:4px;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}(1).css-1exptwg{z-index:1500;color:#FFFFFF;font-family:IBM Plex Sans,sans-serif,Playfair Display,serif;font-size:16px;line-height:body1.lineHeight;}

Demandez un accès gratuit au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

18. Search and seizure operations(1)

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise