Introduction

Role of the parties

Role of judge

Contentious matters

Concept

Powers of the judge

Principle of adversarial proceedings

Non-contentious matters

Underlying principles of civil proceedings

Right to bring civil action

Abuse of the right to bring proceedings

Type of action

Concept of action

Interest in bringing proceedings

Standing

Rules governing action

Legal action

Initial claim

Counterclaim

Additional claim

Intervention

Incidental claim

Interruption of limitation period

Application to file suit (demande en justice)

Defense on the merits

Procedural objections (exceptions de procédure)

Procedural bars to admissibility (fins de non-recevoir)

Defenses

Nature of claim

Amount of the claim

Jurisdiction ratione materiae

Principles

Exceptional territorial jurisdiction

Extension of jurisdiction

Territorial jurisdiction

Competent court

Formal requirements

Substantive requirements

Presentation of the QPC (Question prioritaire de constitutionnalité)

Referral to Court of Cassation

Referral to Constitutional Council

Referral of the QPC

Investigation procedure

Conduct of hearing

Decision of the Constitutional Council

Proceedings before Constitutional Council

Priority question of constitutionality (QPC)

Simplified case preparation procedure

Participative procedure for case preparation purposes

Extra-judicial case preparation

Recourse to technical expert

Agreements on extra-judicial case preparation (mise en état)

Disclosure of exhibits

Production of documents

Exhibits

Common provisions for investigations

Rules specific to each investigation

Investigative measures

Disputes concerning private deeds (actes sous seing privé)

Forgery procedure against authentic instruments

Challenges to documentary evidence

Oath sworn as decisive evidence

Oath tendered by way of supplementation

Judicial oath

Administration of evidence

Hearings

Deliberations

Judgment

Formation

Judgment after adversarial proceedings

Judgment by default or judgment after trial

Contentious or non-contentious judgment

Judgment on the merits or provisional ruling (avant dire droit)

Combined judgment

Provisional judgment

Judgment in fast track proceedings

Types

Joinder and severance of proceedings

Interruption of proceedings

Suspension of proceedings

Discontinuance of proceedings (extinction)

Procedural incidents

Plea of lack of jurisdiction

Recusal/Dismissal for legitimate suspicion

Challenging the judge's competence

General rules

Voluntary intervention

Compulsory intervention

Joinder in proceedings (intervention)

Existence of a judgment

Same subject matter, cause, and parties

Authority of res judicata

General conditions of enforcement

Provisional enforcement

Grace period

Enforcement of the judgment

Bearing of costs

Order to pay non-recoverable costs

Verification/Recovery

Claims/Disputes

Costs and expenses

Ordinary remedies

Extraordinary remedies

Remedies

Judgments

Calculation of time-limits

Acts of judicial commissioners

Service of documents

Ordinary notification

Notification between lawyers

International notification

Place of notification

Notification

Communication by electronic means

Procedural acts

1. Ordinary Law of Civil Procedure

The application to bring proceedings before the court (demande en justice) has the effect of interrupting the limitation period and the forefeiture period  (délai de forclusion) (Art. 2241, para. 1, Civil Code), even in the case of interim proceedings  or a interim measures before judgment, provided in this case that the request for expert assessment aims at the same purpose as the main claim or c …

Interruptive effect on imitation period

The application to bring proceedings before the court (demande en justice) has the effect of interrupting the limitation period and the forefeiture period  (délai de forclusion) (Art. 2241, para. 1, Civil Code), even in the case of interim proceedings  or a interim measures before judgment, provided in this case that the request for expert assessment aims at the same purpose as the main claim or concerns all parties . Interruption may also extend to another action when the two actions, although having a distinct cause, aim at the same ends or when they arise from the same contractual relationship .

The application only interrupts the limitation period if it has been served by the creditor themselves to the debtor relying on the limitation . Case law equates a number of acts with a demande en justice including in the case of oral proceedings . This includes the declaration of claim in insolvency proceedings , an investigation report in the context of competition proceedings , the notification of an order for payment , or an attempt at conciliation before referring the matter to the competent court . However, this is not the case for sending a registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt or for the request for the appointment of an expert submitted by simple application .

The application must be filed against the person one wishes to prevent from acquiring a prescriptive right , even if the court before which the application is brought lacks jurisdiction  or if the act of referral to this court is annulled due to a procedural defect (Art. 2241, para. 2, Civil Code) . Indeed, the principle that a legal action interrupts the limitation period is general in nature and applies to all time-limits for bringing proceedings as well as to all cases of lack of jurisdiction. However, if, pursuant to Article 2241, a legal action, even brought before a court lacking jurisdiction, interrupts the limitation period, this interruption is, pursuant to Article 2243 of the same code, null and void when the application is definitively dismissed on substantive grounds or by a bar to proceedings (fin de non recevoir) . A legal action whose lapse is established cannot interrupt the course of the limitation period . Moreover, it cannot have the sole purpose of interrupting the limitation period. Thus, an application to bring an action presented before an incompetent judge, interrupts the limitation period only when it has been filed under conditions that exclude any bad faith on the part of the applicant .

Finally, under Article 2242 of the Civil Code, “the interruption resulting from the application to file suit produces its effects until the termination of the proceedings.” In other words, this effect ceases from the day the dispute is resolved . However, since the provisions of Article 2242 do not have the nature of a mandatory public policy provision, the parties may derogate from them .

Cass. 2e civ., 6 February 2020, No 18-17.868, LawLex202200010291JBJ; 14 January 2021, LawLex202100001582JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 17 October 2019, No 18-19.611, LawLex202200010293JBJ; Cons. Ét., 7th and 2nd combined chambers, 20 November 2020, No 432678, LawLex202200010296JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 16 October 2013, No 12-21.917, LawLex202200010334JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 1 February 2018, No 17-14.664, LawLex201800000279JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 2 June 2010, No 09-13.075, LawLex202200010488JBJ.

Cass. com., 27 January 2015, No 13-20.463, LawLex202100002356JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 16 October 2014, No 13-22.088, LawLex202200010486JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 25 November 2020, No 09-69.124, LawLex202200010286JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 21 March 2019, No 17-10.663, LawLex202200010480JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 21 March 2019, No 17-31.502, LawLex202200010487JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 16 December 2004, No 02-20.364, LawLex202200006645JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 8 April 2004, LawLex202200006628JBJ; Cass. 3e civ., 15 February 2006, No 04-19.864, LawLex202200006496JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 11 December 2008, No 07-16.260, LawLex202200010485JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 8 February 2017, No 15-27.124, LawLex202200010310JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 1 March 2018, No 17-11.238, LawLex202200010312JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 25 June 2002, No 00-14.590, LawLex202200006603JBJ; 20 December 2012, No 11-27.114, LawLex201300000297JBJ.

Cass. com., 8 July 2020, No 18-24.441, LawLex202000001733JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 2 July 2020, No 17-12.611, LawLex202200003258JBJ.

Cass. soc., 22 March 2000, No 98-40.608, LawLex202200006874JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 13 November 2008, No 06-21.745, LawLex202200006879JBJ.

Cass. com., 12 December 1995, No 94-12.793, LawLex202100001927JBJ; 15 March 2005, No 03-17.783, LawLex202100001157JBJ, which classifies the declaration of claim as a court action; 23 October 2019, No 17-25.656, LawLex202100001552JBJ.

Cass. com., 10 July 2008, No 07-17.276, LawLex200800001113JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 11 December 2008, No 07-16.260, LawLex202200010485JBJ.

Cass. soc., 10 December 2015, No 14-24.794, LawLex202300000233JBJ.

Cass. com., 5 April 2011, No 10-15.852, LawLex202200010483JBJ; 14 January 2021, No 19-20.316, LawLex202100001582JBJ.

1. Ordinary Law of Civil Procedure

63. Interruptive effect on imitation period

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

63. Interruptive effect on imitation period

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

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