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

Voluntary intervention, which is subject to the provisions of Articles 328 to 330 of the Code of Civil Procedure, can be principal or ancillary (Art. 328 CPC). It is principal when it raises a claim for the benefit of the person making it (Art. 329 CPC) and ancillary when it supports the claims of a party (Art. 330 CPC) .

Intervention as a principal party requires that the third party has the right to bring proceedings regarding this claim (Art. 329, para. 2, CPC). The third party must have a legitimate interest  and standing to act concerning a personal claim . They must have their own personal right, distinct from that claimed by the principal claimant . The existence of the interest in bringing proceedings is subject to the sovereign assessment of the trial courts . A professional organization or order may be admissible to act in voluntary principal intervention as long as it is vested with the defense of the collective interest of its members . However, lacking the ability to raise a personal claim, a guarantor, who does not have standing to appeal the judgment approving the debtor's transfer plan, also has no claim to assert during the approval of this plan . Similarly, a company whose rights and obligations are not in dispute does not have standing to defend against the action brought against its debtor . Since only the holder of the lease of a commercial premises, where the business is operated, has standing to claim the benefit of the commercial lease status, the intervention of their spouse is likewise inadmissible, even if the business is a common asset and the latter has the status of collaborating spouse . The Court of Cassation specifies that voluntary intervention should not allow for the regularization of proceedings initiated by parties lacking legal personality . It should also not deprive the parties of a right of appeal. Therefore, while those who were neither parties nor represented in the first instance may intervene in the appeal, provided they have an interest , the intervention should not allow the intervenor to submit a new dispute and request personal judgments that have not been tested at the first level of jurisdiction . The outcome of the voluntary intervention is not linked to that of the main action when the principal intervenor relies on a personal right that they alone are entitled to exercise .

Ancillary voluntary intervention, which supports the claims of a party, is admissible as long as its author has an interest, for the preservation of their rights, in supporting this party (Art. 330 CPC) . It is distinct from principal intervention because it raises no claims for the benefit of its author . Thus, the intervention of a works council, which is limited to supporting the claims of a company whose standing is not contested, is admissible as long as it justifies an interest in intervening voluntarily in an ancillary capacity in the proceedings to preserve its rights, in order to express its opinion . Conversely, the intervention of a company requesting the reversal of the judgment is inadmissible when it is not a party to the proceedings and its sole objective is to provide information to support the thesis of a company, external to the dispute in question, condemned “in its place by the first judges to repair the consequences” . The interest of the ancillary voluntary intervenor is subject to the sovereign assessment of the trial courts . Bound by an obligation to provide reasons, the court cannot declare the ancillary voluntary intervention inadmissible by reasons that dismiss the interest for the intervenor to support the claims of the principal claimant to ensure the preservation of their rights . The ancillary nature of the intervention ties the fate of the intervention to that of the principal claim. The ancillary voluntary intervenor, having interests that are not distinct from the party they support, benefits indivisibly from the decision along with both parties . Since the intervenor raises no claims for themselves, the inadmissibility of the principal claim logically results in the inadmissibility of the intervention . The withdrawal of the party supported by the intervenor also results in the termination of the ancillary voluntary intervention . Ancillary intervention also cannot authorize the intervenor to exercise remedies in place of the principal party, as they cannot assert any personal rights . However, the Court of Cassation has specified that this inadmissibility is not a mandatory public policy provision .

Cass. 3e civ., 26 January 2022, LawLex202300010805JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 4 June 2007, LawLex202100001039JBJ; Cass. com., 11 December 2007, LawLex202300013931JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 28 February 1995, LawLex202200005684JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 11 June 1975, LawLex202300013939JBJ; 11 March 1981, LawLex202300013940JBJ; 4 March 1999, LawLex202300013938JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 11 July 2018, LawLex202300007884JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 21 February 1990, LawLex202300013943JBJ; Cass. com., 10 December 2002, LawLex202100003936JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 11 April 2013, LawLex202300010825JBJ.

Cass. com., 9 February 2010, LawLex202100002207JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 24 May 2018, LawLex202200006882JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 17 November 2005, LawLex202300013941JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 7 July 2011, LawLex202300013925JBJ.

Cass. com., 15 November 1994, LawLex202300013944JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 16 July 2020, LawLex202300013926JBJ.

Cass. com., 14 October 2020, LawLex202200009355JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 3 April 2003, LawLex202300013937JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 7 June 1995, LawLex202300010818JBJ; Cass. com., 24 May 2018, LawLex202300010813JBJ; 15 May 2019, LawLex202300010810JBJ.

Cass. com., 15 May 2019, LawLex202300010810JBJ.

Cass. com., 10 July 2012, LawLex202300013930JBJ.

Cass. com., 16 November 1982, LawLex202300013945JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 29 September 2011, LawLex202300013927JBJ; Cass. com., 19 June 2012, LawLex202300013932JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 13 January 2016, LawLex202300002289JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 24 February 1993, LawLex202300002288JBJ.

Cass. com., 21 October 1975, LawLex202300013922JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 28 February 1995, LawLex202200005684JBJ; Cass. com., 6 July 2010, LawLex202100004152JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 16 March 2016, LawLex202200009339JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 9 January 2020, LawLex202300004143JBJ.

Cass. soc., 9 May 2018, LawLex202300010814JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 14 January 2021, LawLex202300010827JBJ.

Cass. com., 12 January 2016, LawLex202300010809JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 27 September 2018, LawLex202200006074JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 17 September 2020, LawLex202200002582JBJ.

Cass. soc., 23 June 2010, No 09-60.341, LawLex202300010815JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 23 September 2010, No 09-70.355, LawLex202300010802JBJ; 27 September 2012, No 11-22.278, LawLex202200009508JBJ.

Principal or ancillary intervention

236. Principal or ancillary intervention