FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Grégoire Bertrou and Delphine Grimond, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
in discussions with employee representatives within one month. 3.8 Mechanisms for Changes to Length/ Timetable/Disposal of Proceedings In compensation cases, courts manage the calendar for liability, publicity, opt-in windows, and the col- lective liquidation timetable, including homologation steps and extensions when renegotiation is required. Courts can accelerate disposal by dismissing mani- festly unfounded claims at the outset. They may order interim measures in injunctive actions. 3.9 Funding and Costs Financing remains a central challenge in the effec- tive implementation of class actions. Claimant asso- ciations must have access to sufficient resources not only to initiate proceedings, but also to see them through to completion. Their responsibility does not end with obtaining a favourable judgment; it continues until compensation is distributed to the victims. This long-term commitment requires significant financial resilience. In addition to standard legal fees, the compensation phase may involve organising mediation procedures between the defendant and group members, espe- cially in cases of collective liquidation. These media- tion efforts are generally coordinated by the claimant association and can involve substantial logistical and financial commitments, particularly where the class includes a large number of victims. Although the law allows the defendant to cover cer- tain costs, such as an advance for expenses incurred during the damages phase, this remains uncertain at the beginning of litigation. Furthermore, if the action is unsuccessful and the defendant is not held liable, the association may be ordered to pay the opposing party’s legal fees under Article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This financial risk acts as a significant deterrent, particularly for non-profit entities with lim- ited reserves, and may dissuade them from pursuing class actions altogether. In an effort to address this structural obstacle, the Law of 30 April 2025 formally introduces the possi- bility of third-party litigation funding. However, this
mechanism is subject to strict safeguards designed to preserve the claimant’s independence and protect the integrity of the proceedings. That said, a fundamental question arises: why would a third party finance such an action without holding a vested interest in the outcome? In practice, most funders are likely to expect a financial return, raising concerns that such arrangements might compromise the claimant association’s objectivity. More critically, there is a risk that third-party funding could be mis- used as a strategic tool to harm a competitor. One could easily imagine scenarios in which companies covertly finance class actions against rivals with the intent of destabilising their operations or damaging their reputation. Aware of this risk, the legislature has imposed safe- guards to prevent abuse. In particular, the law requires the avoidance of conflicts of interest. If a conflict is alleged, the court may require the association to pro- duce evidence demonstrating the funder’s independ- ence. Should the court find that the association fails to meet the required standard of independence, the consequences are severe: the class action must be declared inadmissible, and the court is obligated to refuse to homologate (approve) any settlement agree- ment reached between the parties. These protections aim to strike a balance between enabling access to justice and ensuring procedural integrity, albeit they remain limited in scope. The law does not provide for ex ante certification or approval of third-party funders, nor does it impose disclosure obligations akin to those found in other jurisdictions. Alternative funding models were not adopted, but they could have been considered. For example: • in Poland, affected consumers may be required to contribute financially to the action; • in the United States and Canada, contingency fee arrangements (where lawyers are paid only upon success and receive a share of the recovery) are widely used to fund collective litigation. Although these models entail risks and ethical con- cerns, they represent viable options for reducing
115 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook