FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Emmanuel Reille, Dimitri Dimitrov, Franck Audran, Laura Castex and Elizabeth Gautier, Gide Loyrette Nouel
ence over the initiation or conduct of class actions that could harm the interests of the persons repre - sented. Furthermore, such third-party funding must be publicly disclosed. 11.2 Costs Costs pertaining to proceedings, processes and enforcement procedures include fees, taxes, govern - ment royalties, cost of translation, allowances for wit - nesses, and expert fees. These legal costs are usually borne by the losing party, unless the judge imposes the entirety or part of them on another party by a rea - soned decision (Articles 695–696 of the FCPC). Attorney’s fees are not included in the legal costs. A judge may, however, order the losing party to pay additional sums that are not part of the legal costs – taking into consideration the rules of equity and the financial situation of this party (Article 700 of the FCPC). Orders to deposit funds as security to cover costs are rarely granted. They usually only concern expert fees. Pursuant to Article R420-3 of the FCC, the Paris Court of Appeal has exclusive jurisdiction to rule on appeals against decisions rendered in private enforcement competition cases. In September 2016, Chamber 5-4 of the Paris Court of Appeal specialised in hearing appeals against first-instance judgments on private enforcement antitrust cases. Additionally, in 2018, an international chamber was created within the Paris Court of Appeal allowing the parties to plead in Eng - lish. 12. Appeals 12.1 Basis of Appeal
The decisions of the Paris Court of Appeal are them - selves subject to appeal to the French Supreme Court. This is not a third level of jurisdiction, as the French Supreme Court does not rule on the merits of a case. Instead, the French Supreme Court is only required to decide whether the rules of law have been correctly applied.
13. Looking Forward 13.1 Legislative Trends and Other Developments
The entry into force of the new class action regime introduced by the DDADUE Law could give new momentum to such actions in France. Indeed, this new regime aims to make class actions more acces - sible and attractive ‒ in particular, by opening them up to a larger number of claimants and providing for the possibility of third-party financing. It remains to be seen whether victims of anti-competitive practices and third-party financiers avail themselves of this new procedure. Also, private enforcement cases based on the Digital Markets Act (DMA) are likely to develop in the com - ing years. Indeed, third parties are now able to bring claims on the basis of the DMA rules – either as a follow-on procedure when the EC has issued a deci - sion against a gatekeeper or as a standalone claim when such a decision has not been issued.
96 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook