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 initiation of an appeal to the Court of Cassation primarily renders inadmissible any new grounds that were not presented before the trial courts and are raised for the first time before the Court of Cassation (Art. 619, para. 1, Code of Civil Procedure). However, this principle has an exception for grounds of public policy, based on the violation of a provision of general interest , as well as …

Inadmissibility of new grounds

The initiation of an appeal to the Court of Cassation primarily renders inadmissible any new grounds that were not presented before the trial courts and are raised for the first time before the Court of Cassation (Art. 619, para. 1, Code of Civil Procedure). However, this principle has an exception for grounds of public policy, based on the violation of a provision of general interest , as well as new grounds of pure law that do not involve any fact not assessed and established by the challenged decision (Art. 619, para. 2, 1°, Code of Civil Procedure) , or grounds arising from the challenged decision (Art. 619, para. 2, 2°, Code of Civil Procedure).

Arguments considered as new, mixed in fact and law, and therefore inadmissible, are those not raised before the Court of Appeal. Thus, when they are raised for the first time before the Court of Cassation and require the assessment of circumstances not previously debated, the following are inadmissible: the argument invoking the authority, in civil matters, of res judicata in criminal matters , or based on the incompetence of judicial courts , the lack of interest in bringing proceedings by an organization/union (syndicat) , an unfair contractual term , the one-year time bar , or the one based on the nemo auditur rule to thwart a restitution action . The same applies to the exception based on the existence of a preliminary question (question préjudicielle)  , or a serious dispute . This is also the case for the argument based on the res judicata authority attached to a decision admitting a claim , or an insufficiency in the handwritten mention on suretyship documents, even if this mention was reproduced in their decision by the trial court , the one concerning the admissibility of submissions and exhibits filed on the day of the closure order , or related to the starting point of the prescription period .

On the other hand, considered purely a matter of law and, consequently, admissible, is the plea claiming that the charterer of a ship can limit their liability, the one based on the violation of the rule that creditors of a debtor in judicial recovery or liquidation for a cause prior to the initiation of these proceedings must submit to the claims verification procedure, the argument of an expropriated party based on a breach of the principle of equality of arms due to the presence of the Government Commissioner in the proceedings for setting expropriation compensation in violation of the provisions of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the one based on the irregularity of the consultation of staff representatives under Article L. 122-32-5 of the Labor Code, or the impossibility for the court to reclassify a fixed-term employment contract as an indefinite-term employment contract in the absence of a request from the employee, or the one based on the employer's status as a private individual, as long as it is based on facts known to the trial courts, submitted to their assessment, noted in the contested decision, and does not require consideration of any factual finding not derived from the contested judgment.

Article 620, para. 2, of the Code of Civil Procedure specifies that the rule of inadmissibility of new arguments also applies to the judges of the Court of Cassation, who may, unless otherwise provided, quash the contested decision by ex officio raising a point of pure law. Furthermore, this provision allows the Court of Cassation to substitute a point of pure law for an erroneous reason or disregard an erroneous but superfluous legal reason (Art. 620, para. 1, CPC).

Cass. 1re civ., 21 November 1995, LawLex200400001580JBJ, considering that the argument based on the expiration of the short period set by Article 1648 of the Civil Code is not a mandatory public policy provision and therefore cannot be raised for the first time before the Court of Cassation; 17 January 2006, LawLex202300014806JBJ, considering that the bar to proceedings based on res judicata not having been invoked before the liberties and detentions judge cannot be raised for the first time before the Court of Cassation as it is not a mandatory public policy provision; Cass. 2e civ., 17 September 2020, LawLex202300011112JBJ.

Cass. com., 4 April 2006, LawLex202300014834JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 9 April 2013, LawLex202400004116JBJ;  Cass. com., 9 July 2013, LawLex202200010138JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 8 April 2021, LawLex202400004117JBJ.

Cass. com., 20 June 1995, LawLex202200002827JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 15 December 1999, LawLex202300014839JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 20 November 2003, LawLex202300014808JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 9 January 2008, LawLex202300012175JBJ.

Cass. com., 1 March 1971, LawLex202300014812JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 6 May 1970, LawLex202300014809JBJ.

Cass. soc., 19 November 1987, LawLex202300014836JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 21 November 1995, LawLex200400001580JBJ; 3 December 1991, LawLex200300001214JBJ.

Cass. soc., 23 April 1970, LawLex202300012174JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 6 March 1991, LawLex202400003928JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 4 November 1998, LawLex202300000974JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 7 February 1996, LawLex202200002095JBJ.

1. Ordinary Law of Civil Procedure

279. Inadmissibility of new grounds

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

279. Inadmissibility of new grounds

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