Introduction

Subject-matter jurisdiction

Territorial jurisdiction

Extensions of jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

Initiation of the proceedings

Instructing counsel

Submissions

Registry

Rules common to all procedures

Ordinary contentious procedure

Non-contentious proceedings

Single-judge procedure

Fixed-date procedure

Written procedure

Ordinary procedure

Interim relief proceedings

Expedited trial on the merits

Oral proceedings

Ex parte proceedings (sur requête)

Referral procedure by decision of the criminal court

Specific procedures

Proceedings before the Judicial Court

Initiation of proceedings

Proceedings

General procedure

Interim orders

Orders on ex parte application

Expedited proceedings on the merits

Powers of the President

Proceedings before the Commercial Court

Proceedings before the Judicial Court and the Commercial Court

2. Proceedings before the Judicial Court and the Commercial Court

Since the reform of the investigative procedure in civil and commercial matters and the entry into force of Decree No 2012-1451 of 24 December 2012 , the reporting judge (juge rapporteur) is replaced by the judge responsible for investigating the case (juge chargé d’instruire l’affaire). Their role is to organize, if necessary, the exchanges between the appearing parties under the conditions and sanctions provided for in Article 446-2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Art. 861-3, para. 1, CPC). The decision to entrust the investigation of a case to a judge falls within the competence of the bench, which freely chooses between referral and recourse to this judge. Despite the discretionary nature of this choice, the parties must be able to determine whether the judgment formation or the judge responsible for investigating the case has ruled and to know the names or name of the members composing the court . If the Code of Civil Procedure requires that the judge responsible for investigating the case, who has heard the parties alone, be part of the composition of the formation that deliberates to judge the case, no provision prohibits them from presiding over it .

In order to expedite the proceedings, the judge responsible for the case has extensive powers. He may, in particular, hear the parties (Art. 862, para. 1, Code of Civil Procedure), invite them at any time to provide the factual and legal explanations he deems necessary for the resolution of the dispute, and require them to produce within a specified time all documents or justifications to clarify the matter, failing which he may proceed and rule by drawing all consequences from the party's abstention or refusal (Art. 446-3, para. 1, and 862, para. 2, Code of Civil Procedure), proceed with the joinder and severance of proceedings (Art. 864 Code of Civil Procedure), and order, even ex officio, any investigative measure (Art. 865, para. 1, Code of Civil Procedure) . He ensures compliance with the adversarial principle. In doing so, he may exempt a party from appearing at a subsequent hearing under the conditions provided for in Article 861-1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Art. 861-3, para. 2, Code of Civil Procedure). He resolves issues related to the disclosure of exhibits (Art. 865, para. 2, Code of Civil Procedure) . Furthermore, the judge responsible for the case records the conciliation, even partial, of the parties and may also appoint a judicial conciliator or, since 1 September 2024 and the entry into force of Decree No 2024-673 of 3 July 2024 , decide that the parties will be summoned to an amicable settlement hearing as provided for in Articles 774-1 to 774-4 (Art. 863, para. 1 and 2, Code of Civil Procedure). These decisions, recorded in the file, constitute measures of judicial administration (Art. 863, para. 3, Code of Civil Procedure). Finally, he records the termination of the proceedings and, if necessary, rules on the costs and applications made under Article 700 of the same code (Art. 865, para. 3, Code of Civil Procedure).

The measures taken by the judge responsible for investigating the case are simply noted in the file, with notice given to the parties (Art. 866, para. 1, CPC). However, in the cases provided for in Article 865, the judge responsible for investigating the case rules by reasoned order, subject to the specific rules applicable to investigative measures (Art. 866, para. 2, CPC). Conversely, when the judge responsible for investigating merely refers the case to the court, they do not need to rule by reasoned order . The orders of the judge responsible for investigating the case do not, in principle, have the authority of res judicata (Art. 867 CPC) and are not subject to any appeal independently of the judgment on the merits (Art. 868, para. 1, CPC). However, they may be appealed either in the cases and conditions provided for in matters of expertise or within fifteen days of their date when they record the termination of proceedings (Art. 868, para. 2, CPC).

At the conclusion of his mission, the judge responsible for investigating the case refers it to the court as soon as the state of the investigation allows (Art. 869 CPC). At the request of the president of the bench, the judge responsible for investigating the case gives an oral report of the case at the hearing before the pleadings, but this report can also be given by the president of the bench or another judge of the bench he designates (Art. 870, para. 1, CPC). This report outlines the subject of the application and the arguments of the parties, specifies the factual and legal issues raised by the dispute, and mentions elements that clarify the debate, without revealing the opinion of the judge who authored it (Art. 870, para. 2, CPC). No text requires that the name of the judge responsible for the oral report of the case at the hearing be cited in the decision, nor does it sanction by invalidity the judgment that does not include the mention of the report's execution. Finally, the judge responsible for investigating the case may also, if the parties do not object, hold the hearing alone to hear the pleadings. He then reports to the court in his deliberation (Art. 871 CPC). A judgment where the judge responsible for investigating the case neither sat during the deliberation nor during the pronouncement of the judgment must be annulled.

Decree No 2012-1451 of 24 December 2012 concerning expert assessment and investigation of cases before the Judicial Courts, OJ 0301 of 27 December 2012.

CA Douai, 12 December 2019, LawLex202400009861JBJ.

CA Paris, 4 May 2018, LawLex202400009862JBJ.

Chambéry, 5 February 2019, LawLex202400009863JBJ, which specifies that Article 865 of the Code of Civil Procedure grants the judge responsible for investigating the case the power to order any investigative measure, which includes the possibility of ordering an inspection upon the application of one of the parties, but under the conditions governing orders on ex parte application.

Cass. com., 12 March 2013, LawLex202400009864JBJ, which considers that by limiting itself to resolving difficulties related to the disclosure of exhibits within the powers it holds under Article 865 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the reporting judge does not examine the merits of the dispute, which the court remains seized of.

Decree No 2024-673 of 3 July 2024 on various measures to simplify civil procedure and relating to regulated professions, OJ 0158 of 5 July 2024, Art. 1, 3°.

Cass. com., 29 April 1986, LawLex202400000246JBJ.

105. Role of the judge responsible for investigation