FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Grégoire Bertrou and Delphine Grimond, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
4.2 Legislative Reform The recent reform has altered a wide array of legal and procedural settings, reshaping both the incentives and the mechanics of collective redress. While its full effects will take time to materialise, stakeholders are watching closely to see whether these changes will translate into more frequent class actions and more successful outcomes, both in terms of recovery for claimants and deterrence for defendants.
tion with the same facts. However, group members who have been only partially compensated retain the right to pursue individual claims for the unrecovered portion of their losses. In the event that collective settlement negotiations fail, victims retain the right to initiate individual legal actions under common law for any losses not compensated through the class action mechanism. This aligns with the French principle of full reparation ( réparation intégrale du préjudice ), which stipulates that victims should be restored, as much as possible, to the position they would have been in if the harm had not occurred, neither more nor less. Over-com- pensation and under-compensation are both contrary to this foundational principle. The reform also confirms a well-established legal rule: any contractual clause that aims to prevent an indi- vidual from joining a class action is null and void. Finally, the new regime allows class actions to be brought directly against the liable party’s insurer, regardless of the claim’s subject matter. This removes the earlier limitation that had confined direct actions to only certain legal areas.
5. Key Trends 5.1 Impact of Key Trends
The unification of procedures and expansion of recov- erable harms signal a shift toward a more effective French regime, while the retention of opt-in and lim- ited disclosure constrains scale and deterrence. The introduction of third-party funding with safe- guards addresses a structural financing bottleneck, while the civil fine for faute lucrative adds a punitive element with a funding feedback loop. Cross-border capacity under Directive 2020/1828 positions France as a venue for EU-wide actions, par- ticularly in digital, consumer, and financial services. However, the absence of enhanced evidence-gather- ing tools and the opt-in model may continue to limit participation rates and overall impact, making judicial practice and funding availability critical determinants of the reform’s real-world effectiveness.
4. Legislative Reform 4.1 Policy Development
Drivers behind the 2025 reform included unifying sec- toral regimes, broadening standing and compensa- ble harms, enhancing transparency, and facilitating cross-border enforcement as per the EU Directive. The reform also reflects a governance objective: to strengthen compliance incentives through effective private enforcement mechanisms.
119 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook