FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Barbara Levy, Paul Talbourdet and Alison Vogt, De Pardieu Brocas Maffei
Act No 2016-1321 of 7 October 2016, amended by Act No 2019-222 of 23 March 2019, implemented open data for judgments of the Cour de cassation and the French courts of appeal via the “Judilibre” search engine. Judilibre is available on the Cour de cassa- tion ’s website and makes the judgments rendered by the Cour de cassation and the courts of appeal avail - able to everyone, as of 1 October 2021 and 21 April 2022 respectively. 3. Foreign Judgments 3.1 Legal Issues Concerning Enforcement of Foreign Judgments The three key conflicts private international law aims to resolve are those relating to jurisdiction, choice of law, and the recognition/enforcement of foreign judg - ments. There are three main types of law relevant to the enforcement of a foreign judgment: • French national law; • multilateral conventions; and • bilateral conventions between one country and another. France is a party to a large number of multilateral treaties (all of which are available on the Légifrance legal portal), including the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, and also to bilateral treaties. Throughout the EU, the primary tool used to enforce foreign judgments is Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of 6 December 2012 (the “Brussels 1a Regulation”). This recast regulation has applied since 10 January 2015 and replaced Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (the “New Brussels I Regulation”), which continues to apply to the recognition and enforcement of all judg - ments rendered in proceedings initiated before 10 January 2015. These regulations are supplemented by a number of other pieces of European legislation, as follows: • Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on Insolvency Proceedings, which came
into force on 31 May 2002 and was repealed and replaced by Regulation (EU) No 2015/848 of 20 May 2015, which came into force on 26 June 2017 – this version was then amended by Regula - tion (EU) 2021/2260, which came into force on 15 December 2021; • Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European Order for payment procedure (the “European Payment Order Regula - tion”), which came into force on 31 December 2006 amended by Regulation (EU) No 2015/2421; • Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 of the European Par - liament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 estab - lishing a European Small Claims Procedure (up to EUR2,000) (the “European Small Claims Procedure Regulation”), which came into force on 1 Janu - ary 2009 and was amended by the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1259 of 19 June 2017; and • Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 of the European Par - liament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 creating a European Enforcement Order (EEO) for uncon - tested claims (the “European Enforcement Order Regulation”), which came into force on 21 January 2005. It should be noted that doctrinal discussions are pend - ing regarding a reform of the Brussels I bis Regula - tion. The Cour de cassation has conducted various cycles of conferences to establish a common French vision before upcoming debates within the European institutions. The avenues mentioned for reforming the regulation include the relationship of the Brussels I bis Regulation with arbitration, the extension to defend - ants domiciled in third countries, collective actions, choice of court clauses, contractual matters, the notion of decision, and – in particular – the enforce - ment of judgments. Upcoming changes may therefore be anticipated. The relationship between the EU and Norway, Swit - zerland and Iceland is governed by a similar piece of legislation to the Brussels 1a Regulation – namely, the Convention on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters of the European Community with Iceland,
193 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook