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

According to Article 800 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the partial closure order, pronounced as a sanction in case of negligence by lawyers during the proceedings, may be retracted, either ex officio or at the request of a party, in two cases: to allow a party to respond to new claims or arguments presented after the order, and in the event of a duly justified serious cause (para. 2).
In other c …

Revocation of the order closing the preparatory phase

According to Article 800 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the partial closure order, pronounced as a sanction in case of negligence by lawyers during the proceedings, may be retracted, either ex officio or at the request of a party, in two cases: to allow a party to respond to new claims or arguments presented after the order, and in the event of a duly justified serious cause (para. 2).

In other cases, para. 1 of Article 803 provides that the closure order can only be revoked in the presence of a serious cause occurring after its issuance . The appointment of a lawyer after the closure does not, in itself, constitute a cause for revocation.

Applications for revocation of the order of closure must be made by submissions (Art. 802, para. 2, CPC). An application for revocation made by letter is not regular . Revocation may be pronounced either ex officio  or at the request of the parties . The Court of Cassation emphasizes that the consent of the parties has no impact on the decision. Thus, neither the consent of the litigant to the application for revocation of the order of closure made by the opposing party, nor an application made by mutual agreement of the parties, is likely to influence the terms of the dispute and does not deprive the courts of their power to reject this application .

The revocation not being implicit, the reopening of proceedings to allow the parties to make submissions on a possible revocation of the closure order does not entail its revocation .

Furthermore, the decree of 29 July 2023, introducing measures to promote the amicable settlement of disputes before the Judicial Court , added a paragraph 4 to Article 803, which provides for a new scenario for revoking the closure order: after obtaining the parties' opinions, the pre-trial judge may revoke the order to decide, in accordance with Article 785 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to summon the parties to an amicable settlement hearing, according to the procedures set out in Articles 774-1 to 774-4 of the same code.

Cass. 2e civ., 10 June 2004, LawLex202300014102JBJ, JCP No 31, 2004, 2618; Cass. 3e civ., 30 January 2013, LawLex202300014119JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 25 May 2023, LawLex202300014108JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 1 April 2004, LawLex202300014109JBJ; 11 April 2013, LawLex202300014113JBJ.

Cass. 2e civ., 10 January 1979, LawLex202500000301JBJ.

Cass. 1re civ., 22 July 1986, LawLex202500000331JBJ; Cass. 3e civ., 5 April 1978, LawLex202500000323JBJ; Cass. 1re civ., 29 January 1985, LawLex202300011276JBJ; Cass. 3e civ., 29 May 1991, LawLex202200004979JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 11 January 2001, LawLex202300014807JBJ; 8 December 2022, LawLex202300002859JBJ, holding that it is incumbent upon the party who, having filed submissions after the closure order, claims not to have been previously informed of the date of its issuance, to request its revocation; 8 December 2022, LawLex202300002859JBJ, considering that the court is not required to verify ex officio whether the parties have been informed of the date of the closure order and that it is thus incumbent upon the party who, having filed submissions after this order, claims not to have been previously notified of the date of its issuance, to request its revocation.

Cass. 3e civ., 28 October 1985, LawLex202200005355JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 18 November 1992, LawLex202200005266JBJ.

Cass. 3e civ., 4 February 1986, LawLex202500000121JBJ; Cass. 2e civ., 18 October 1989, LawLex202500000120JBJ. - See also Cass. 2e civ., 5 May 1978, LawLex202500000328JBJ: considering that a voluntary intervention after the closure order does not automatically result in its revocation.

Decree No 2023-686 of 29 July 2023 on measures promoting the amicable settlement of disputes before the Judicial Court, OJ 0175 of 30 July 2023.

2. Proceedings before the Judicial Court and the Commercial Court

59. Revocation of the order closing the preparatory phase

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Sous parties

Les notions juridiques connexes

59. Revocation of the order closing the preparatory phase

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

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Sous parties

Les notions juridiques connexes

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