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

Interim proceedings constitute a provisional procedure that addresses urgency. A fast procedure like the expedited procedure on the merits, interim proceedings are oral.
Under Articles 834 to 838 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the president of the Judicial Court or the judge of the protection litigation, within the limits of their jurisdiction, may order a number of interim measures, under certai …

Interim procedure (procédure de référé)

Interim proceedings constitute a provisional procedure that addresses urgency. A fast procedure like the expedited procedure on the merits, interim proceedings are oral.

Under Articles 834 to 838 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the president of the Judicial Court or the judge of the protection litigation, within the limits of their jurisdiction, may order a number of interim measures, under certain conditions.

Article 836 of the Code of Civil Procedure specifies that the powers of the president of the Judicial Court in this matter extend to all areas where there is no specific interim procedure.

First, under Article 834 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the president of the Judicial Court or the judge of the protection litigation, within the limits of their jurisdiction, may, in all urgent cases , order in interim proceedings any measures that do not encounter any serious dispute or that are justified by the existence of a disagreement. The judge has sovereign discretion to assess the necessity of the required measure , noting that the argument based on the existence of a serious dispute does not constitute a procedural objection but a means to hinder the powers of the interim relief judge . Thus, in the presence of facts attributed to the manager of a company, likely to cause irreparable harm to its interests and paralyze its administration, the appointment of a provisional administrator in interim proceedings is necessary given the threat to the company . Similarly, the simple application of a clear and precise clause in a residence contract, which provides for its termination one month after an unsuccessful formal notice by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt to pay the agreed fee, raises no serious dispute . Conversely, a serious dispute is decided by the judge who grants a request made by the lessor of commercial premises seeking to resume their operation, even though the tenant invokes breaches by the lessor, holding them responsible for the weak traffic and lack of commercial viability of the extension of the shopping center housing the leased premises . The existence of a serious dispute, likely to affect the powers of the interim relief judge to order a measure, is assessed at the date of their decision .

Pursuant to Article 835, para. 1, even in the presence of a serious dispute, the president of the Judicial Court or the judge of the protection litigation, within the limits of their jurisdiction, may always order in interim proceedings the necessary interim protective measures or restoration measures, either to prevent imminent damage , or to stop a manifestly unlawful disturbance . Furthermore, “in cases where the existence of the obligation is not seriously contestable, they may grant an advance to the creditor, or order the performance of the obligation even if it is an obligation to do” (Art. 835, para. 2, Code of Civil Procedure) .

Furthermore, according to Article 837, para. 1, of the same code, “at the request of one of the parties and if urgency justifies it, the president of the Judicial Court or the judge of the protection litigation seized in interim proceedings may refer the case to a hearing for which he sets the date so that a decision on the merits can be made." The judge then ensures that the defendant has sufficient time to prepare their defense, and their order results in the court being seized. When representation by a lawyer is mandatory before the court to which the case is referred, proceedings are then conducted as stated in Article 842 and the last three paragraphs of Article 844 [relating to the fixed-date procedure]. When the president of the court has ordered the re-summoning of the non-appearing defendant, the latter is summoned by an act of a judicial commissioner at the initiative of the applicant (Art. 837, para. 2).

Finally, Article 838 specifies that “the president of the Judicial Court has the same powers in disputes arising from the employment contract when they fall within his jurisdiction.”

If the rules regarding the powers of the court in interim proceedings have not been affected by the various reforms of civil procedure, the rules governing interim orders before the Judicial Court have nonetheless undergone some changes.

On the one hand, since the entry into force of Decree No 2020-1452 of 27 November 2020  on 1 January 2021, Article 836-1 provides that the parties may, at any time during the proceedings, expressly agree for the proceedings to take place without a hearing in accordance with the provisions of Article L. 212-5-1 of the Code of Judicial Organization. In this case, Article 828 applies and, when representation by a lawyer is not mandatory, Article 829 applies. According to the first text, the court organizes the exchanges between the parties, who present their claims and arguments in writing. Communication between them is made by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt or by notification between lawyers, and proof is provided to the court within the time limits it sets. The court sets the date by which the parties must communicate their claims, arguments, and exhibits to the court registry. On that date, the registry informs the parties of the date on which the judgment will be rendered. This judgment is adversarial (Art. 828, para. 2). The court may decide to hold a hearing if it considers that it is not possible to render a decision based on the written evidence or if one of the parties requests it (Art. 828, para. 3). When representation by a lawyer is not mandatory and the declaration by which each party consents to the proceedings without a hearing is made during the proceedings, it is submitted or sent to the registry (Art. 829, para. 1, CPC). It must include, under penalty of invalidity, for natural persons, the indication of the name, first names, profession, domicile, nationality, date, and place of birth (Art. 829, para. 1, 1°, CPC) and, for legal entities, the indication of their form, name, registered office, and the body that legally represents them (Art. 829, para. 1, 2°, CPC). Finally, it is written, dated, and signed by the author, who must attach to it, in original or photocopy, any official document proving their identity and containing their signature (Art. 829, para. 2, CPC).

On the other hand, to promote amicable settlement before the Judicial Court, Article 836-2 provides that the president of the Judicial Court or the judge of the protection litigation seized in interim proceedings may decide that the parties will be summoned to an amicable settlement hearing according to the procedures provided in Articles 774-1 to 774-4. This provision applies to proceedings initiated from 1 November 2023 (Art. 6 D. 2023-686 of 29 July 2023).

Finally, the interim proceedings before the president of the Judicial Court must comply with the general provisions of Articles 484 to 492 of the Code of Civil Procedure governing interim orders. Pursuant to Article 485, the application is brought by way of a writ of summons to a hearing held for this purpose on the usual days and times for interim proceedings (para. 1), with the interim judge being able to allow a summons at a specified time, even on public holidays or non-working days if the case requires urgency (para. 2). The judge ensures that sufficient time has elapsed between the summons and the hearing for the summoned party to prepare their defense (Art. 486 CPC). When the interim application concerns an investigative measure carried out by a specialist or an expert measure, the defendant who has indicated, before the hearing, acquiescence to the application, is exempt from appearing. Nevertheless, the judge always has the discretion to order their presence before him (Art. 486-1 CPC). Furthermore, the judge may refer the case in interim proceedings to the full bench of the court at a hearing for which he sets the date, with the decision rendered under these conditions being adversarial (Art. 487 CPC). The interim order does not have, in the main, the authority of res judicata. It can only be modified or revoked in interim proceedings in the event of new circumstances (Art. 488 CPC).

If necessary, the court may order that the enforcement of the interim order will take place solely on the basis of the original document (Art. 489, Code of Civil Procedure). According to Article 490, the interim order may be appealed, unless it is issued by the first president of the Court of Appeal or if it was rendered as a final decision due to the amount or subject of the claim (para. 1), the order rendered as a final decision by default being subject to opposition (para. 2). The time limit for appeal or opposition is fifteen days (para. 3). Finally, “the interim relief judge who attaches a penalty payment to their decision may reserve the liquidation and rules on the costs” (Art. 491, Code of Civil Procedure).

Cass. 1re civ., 30 May 2000, LawLex202300014741JBJ: the implementation of the requested expert assessment cannot be ordered in interim proceedings if urgency is not demonstrated; Cass. com., 4 December 2001, LawLex200200000583JBJ: in all cases of urgency, even in the event of serious dispute, measures justified by the existence of a disagreement may be ordered in interim proceedings.

Cass. 1re civ., 8 July 2003, LawLex202300014744JBJ: no serious challenge prevents the judge in interim proceedings from ordering the defendant to disclose to the bank the names and last known addresses of the drawers of checks deposited by him and credited to his account, but subsequently lost by the bank, so that it could not obtain payment; Cass. soc., 2 March 2004, LawLex202300014828JBJ: the judge in interim proceedings, having noted the urgency, ordered the setting of the agenda and scheduled the committee meeting in the exercise of his powers; Cass. 2e civ., 3 May 2006, LawLex202300014821JBJ: since the operation of a company is paralyzed due to the existing and persistent disagreement between the two partners in the process of divorce and the authorization of liquidation is inevitable, a provisional administrator must be appointed in interim proceedings to manage the company, the urgency being established.

Decree No 2020-1452 of 27 November 2020 on various provisions relating in particular to civil procedure and the compensation procedure for victims of acts of terrorism and other offenses, OJ of 28 November 2020.

Cass. 3e civ., 30 March 2017, LawLex202200006969JBJ.

Cass. com., 17 October 1989, LawLex202300014745JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 2 April 2003, LawLex202300014743JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 5 September 2012, LawLex202300014746JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 22 February 1983, LawLex202400000715JBJ.

Cass. com., 21 March 1984, LawLex202300014823JBJ: given the imminence and severity of the damage resulting from the termination of contractual relations between two companies, the interim relief judge may decide to grant an application seeking to order, under penalty, one of the companies to immediately resume its commercial relations with the applicant and to inform the latter's clients; Cass. ass. plén., 16 November 2001, LawLex202300014818JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 13 March 2007, LawLex202300010904JBJ: the judicial court may order in interim relief any measures to prevent damage or to stop damage caused by the content of an online public communication service, notwithstanding the fact that the authors of the disputed text are not the owners or operators of the site in question; Cass. com., 24 June 2020, LawLex202300014827JBJ: it is not for the interim relief judge to assess the wrongful or unlawful nature of the imminent damage.

Cass. 1re civ. 17 December 2002, LawLex202300014820JBJ: the interim relief judge did not exceed the limits of his jurisdiction by ordering an interim protective measure after noting the existence of an unlawful disturbance resulting from the non-compliance of the premises' development works with urban planning regulations; Cass. 2e civ., 29 March 2006, LawLex202300014822JBJ: the distribution of leaflets by a company on public roads does not have the manifestly unlawful nature justifying a prohibition decision by the interim relief judge, as it is not prohibited by any legal or regulatory provision and the leaflets do not contain any element involving a violation of ethical rules or denigration of a competing company; Cass. soc., 9 March 2011, LawLex202300014829JBJ: the occupation of premises by employees does not constitute a manifestly unlawful disturbance, as no act of material damage, violence, sequestration, or other dangerous behavior towards the personnel on site was established, and it was in reaction to the employer's decision to close a production unit without prior information or consultation of the employee representative bodies; Cass. 3e civ., 11 May 2011, LawLex202300014826JBJ: the installation of a video surveillance system by co-owners on their lot, filming a portion of the common areas without the authorization of the general assembly, constitutes a manifestly unlawful disturbance, as this installation compromises the free exercise of each co-owner's rights over the common areas.

Cass. 3e civ., 16 December 1987, LawLex202300014886JBJ: in cases where the existence of the obligation is not seriously contestable, the interim relief judge may grant an advance to the creditor; Cass. 1re civ., 10 March 1993, LawLex202300014890JBJ: if the advance that the interim relief court may grant has no other limit than the uncontestable amount of the alleged claim, the judges have the discretion to determine, within this limit, the amount to be awarded to the applicant; 18 January 1989, LawLex202300014887JBJ: the interim relief judge cannot, while noting that the defense of non-performance raised by a party to a synallagmatic contract against the request for an advance made by its co-contractor constitutes a serious contestation, at least in part, nevertheless condemn the defendant to pay an advance equal to almost the entire claim invoked by the plaintiff; Cass. 2e civ., 18 October 2007, LawLex202300014889JBJ: the interim relief judge assesses sovereignly, in light of the value and scope of the evidence submitted to him, the existence or non-existence of a serious contestation; Cass. 1re civ., 29 January 2015, LawLex202300014888JBJ: the application for an advance for legal costs made before the interim relief judge can only be granted if the obligation to indemnify the party against whom the application is made is not seriously contestable.

2. Proceedings before the Judicial Court and the Commercial Court

79. Interim procedure (procédure de référé)

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

79. Interim procedure (procédure de référé)

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