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

Judgments can only be enforced if they have been served to those against whom they are enforced (Art. 503 CPC). Notification is carried out by service, unless the law provides otherwise (Art. 675 CPC). This is done by a judicial commissioner (Art. 651 CPC), except in non-contentious matters where notification is made by the court registry by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt. Notification may also consist of the delivery of a simple copy (Art. 676 CPC). In all cases, notification can be made by service even if the law has provided for it in another form (Art. 651 CPC).

Notification is made to the parties themselves (Art. 677 CPC). When the decision concerns several persons, notification must be made separately to each of them . In non-contentious matters, in addition to the parties, the judgment must be notified to third parties whose interests may be affected by the decision, as well as to the Public Prosecutor's Office when an appeal is available to it (Art. 679 CPC). Notification must be made to the representative of the legal entity, if applicable . In the event of a merger-absorption, notification of a judgment must be made to the absorbing company and not to the absorbed company, which has ceased to exist following the publication of its dissolution in the BODACC .

The judgment must also be brought to the attention of the representative in advance when representation is mandatory (Art. 678 CPC). Before the reform introduced by Decree No 2020-1201 , Article 678 provided that the judgment was previously notified to representatives in the form of notifications between lawyers, failing which the notification to the party was void . Now, the judgment is brought to the representative's attention by delivering a copy of the decision by the court registry when the judgment is notified to the parties at its initiative, or in the form of notifications between lawyers in other cases, on pain of nullity of the notification to the party. The notification document intended for the party must mention the completion of this formality. The irregularity of the prior service to the lawyer is a formal defect that only results in the nullity of the service intended for the party if a grievance is justified . However, when the service document to the party mentions the notification to the lawyer, it is inferred that this was done beforehand, the fact that it was carried out on the same day being irrelevant . It is up to the party contesting the reality of this notification to provide proof . If the representative has died or ceased to perform their duties, the notification is made to the party with an indication of the death or cessation of duties (Art. 678, para. 2, CPC). The absence of an indication of the lawyer's cessation of duties in the service document of the judgment to the party constitutes a formal irregularity sanctioned by nullity only if a grievance is justified .

In principle, the time limit for notification of a judgment is ten years (Art. L. 111-4 CPCE). However, a shorter period is provided in certain cases. It is two years from its pronouncement for judgments that decide the main issue and those that, ruling on a procedural objection, a bar to proceedings, or any other incident, terminate the proceedings (Art. 528-1 CPC) , and six months for a judgment rendered by default or deemed adversarial solely because it is subject to appeal (Art. 478 CPC) . The requirements of Article 680 must be observed on pain of invalidity (Art. 693 CPC).

In addition to the information listed in Article 648 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the act of notification of the judgment must clearly indicate the time limit for opposition, appeal, or appeal to the Court of Cassation if one of these remedies is available, as well as the procedures for exercising the remedy, and the penalties incurred in the event of an abusive or dilatory appeal (Art. 680 CPC) . To meet the requirement of mentioning the time limit for the remedy available against the judgment in the notification of a judgment, the act of service of the judgment may reproduce the provisions of the code it expressly refers to . This requirement also implies mentioning the starting point of this time limit  and the place where the remedy must be exercised . The absence of mention or incorrect mention in the act of notification of a judgment of the available remedy, its time limit, or its procedures results in the time limit for the remedy not starting to run . These mentions are prescribed under penalty of invalidity (Art. 693 CPC), provided, however, that proof of the existence of a grievance is provided, and failing that, the act may constitute the necessary prior formal notice for compulsory enforcement .

When the recipient of the notification is a natural person, it is made at the place where they reside, with personal notification being valid regardless of the location, including the workplace. It can also be made at the elected domicile when the law permits or requires it (Art. 689 CPC) . The judicial commissioner, who notes the absence of the recipient at the address declared ten years earlier, must conduct additional investigations, mentioning them, to establish the actual domicile of the party at the date of service in order to carry out personal service . Similarly, merely indicating the recipient's name on the mailbox is not sufficient to establish, in the absence of other efforts, the actual domicile of the recipient of the document .

Cass. 2e civ., 31 May 2001, LawLex202300012393JBJ.

Cass. soc., 30 March 2011, LawLex202300012407JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 2 February 2012, LawLex202300012395JBJ; Cass. com., 13 October 2015, LawLex202300012404JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 6 January 2012, LawLex202300008235JBJ; 26 January 2017, LawLex202300008135JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 29 June 2022, LawLex202300011184JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 24 March 2022, LawLex202300011198JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 19 February 2015, LawLex202300011196JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 4 February 1987, LawLex202300011175JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 10 September 2009, LawLex202300011192JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 23 November 2000, LawLex202300011174JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 12 February 2004, LawLex202300011176JBJ; 14 November 2013, LawLex202300011194JBJ; 24 September 2015, LawLex202300010353JBJ; 3 December 2015, LawLex202300010354JBJ; 28 January 2016, LawLex202300011200JBJ; 3 March 2016, LawLex202300011185JBJ; 4 April 2018, LawLex202300011186JBJ; 17 May 2018, LawLex202300011195JBJ; 28 June 2018, LawLex202300011201JBJ; 24 March 2022, LawLex202300011199JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 14 February 2008, LawLex202300011193JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 9 June 1999, LawLex202300011182JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 19 October 2000, LawLex202400003943JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 4 March 2021, LawLex202300011187JBJ.

Cass. soc., 20 May 2015, LawLex202300012406JBJ.

Decree No 2020-1201 of 30 September 2020 concerning the financial intermediation of alimony payments provided for in Article L. 582-1 of the Social Security Code, JO of 1 October 2020.

Cass. 2e civ., 6 November 2008, LawLex202300012396JBJ, which specified that when the parties having served the judgment are represented by the same lawyer as its recipient, it is not necessary for the service of the judgment to the party to be preceded by a notification to the representative.

Cass. 2e civ., 12 April 2012, LawLex202300012398JBJ; 12 July 2012, LawLex202300012400JBJ; 22 September 2016, LawLex202300012402JB.

Cass. 1re civ., 28 May 2008, LawLex202300012394JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 23 February 2012, LawLex202300011183JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 19 March 2009, LawLex202300012401JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 30 January 2003, LawLex202300011181JBJ; Cass. 3e civ., 21 March 2019, LawLex202300011202JBJ.

Notification obligation

243. Notification obligation