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 disclosure of exhibits between the parties must be spontaneous (Art. 132, para. 2, Code of Civil Procedure) and occur in a timely manner (Art. 15, Code of Civil Procedure). The court has the sovereign power to assess whether they have been filed in a timely manner . Therefore, it may exclude from the proceedings exhibits that have not been disclosed in a timely manner . Also, it may ex officio …

Timely disclosure

The disclosure of exhibits between the parties must be spontaneous (Art. 132, para. 2, Code of Civil Procedure) and occur in a timely manner (Art. 15, Code of Civil Procedure). The court has the sovereign power to assess whether they have been filed in a timely manner . Therefore, it may exclude from the proceedings exhibits that have not been disclosed in a timely manner . Also, it may ex officio raise the mandatory public policy provision based on the violation of the rights of the defense and exclude from the proceedings exhibits disclosed late to a party without being required to first provoke an adversarial debate on this point . However, the timely disclosure of exhibits does not prevent the court from excluding from the proceedings exhibits covered by professional secrecy .

In accordance with the second paragraph of Article 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court may only consider in its decision the arguments, explanations, and documents invoked or submitted by the parties if they have been able to discuss them adversarially. In fact, when it intends to exclude documents from the debate, it is required to explain, even briefly, why these were not submitted in a timely manner before the closure order . It must also specify the particular circumstances that prevented compliance with the adversarial principle  and ensure that the parties were aware of the date set for the closure order . Similarly, before excluding documents from the debates, the court must determine whether these documents provide new elements  requiring a response , and whether, despite the last-minute submission, the opposing party had sufficient time to respond . These requirements contribute to the fairness of the proceedings .

See for an illustration, Cass. 2e civ., 22 March 2006, LawLex202200005730JBJ, holding that the exhibits disclosed within the time limit set by the pre-trial judge, three days before the closure order, were disclosed in a timely manner within the meaning of Articles 15 and 135 of the new Code of Civil Procedure.

CPC, Art. 135; Cass. mixte, 3 February 2006, LawLex202200006708JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 2 December 2004, LawLex202200005686JBJ, specifying that by disclosing, just moments before the closure, which had been postponed twice, a document it had held for several months, a party deliberately attempted to surprise its opponent and adopted behavior contrary to the fairness of the proceedings.

Cass. 3e civ., 7 May 1997, LawLex202100001259JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 4 June 2014, LawLex202200007621JBJ.

Cass. com., 17 November 2015, LawLex202200005804JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 31 May 2000, LawLex202300002487JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 17 February 2004, LawLex202200005676JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 27 May 2004, LawLex202200009769JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 11 January 2006, LawLex202200005706JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 26 September 2002, LawLex202200005739JBJ; Cass. com., 28 September 2004, LawLex202200005754JBJ, considering that it can be inferred from the disclosure, the day before the closure order, of 47 exhibits, the impossibility for the appellant companies to study these exhibits and react, so that the particular circumstances characterizing the non-compliance with the adversarial principle are established, even if only one of the parties requested the rejection of these documents.

Cass. 2e civ., 8 July 2004, LawLex202200005698JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 12 June 2002, LawLex202200005743JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 15 January 2004, LawLex202200005711JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 20 February 2008, LawLex202200005777JBJ; Also see Cass. 3e civ., 6 June 2019, LawLex202300002496JBJ, holding that when the court declares submissions and exhibits disclosed the day before the closure order admissible, it must ascertain that the opposing party had sufficient time to review these documents.

1. Ordinary Law of Civil Procedure

113. Timely disclosure

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

113. Timely disclosure

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