FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Samuel Sauphanor, Alexandra Szekely, Timothée de Saint Viance and Benoît Barré, Le 16 Law
7.3 Crypto-Assets French law recognises crypto-assets ( actifs numériques ) as a sui generis category of intan - gible assets. Defined in Article L.54-10-1 of the French Monetary and Financial Code, the term encompasses digital tokens and other digital representations of value that are not issued or guaranteed by a central bank, not pegged to legal tender and are used as a means of exchange or investment. While crypto-assets are not classified as legal currency, they are treated as property and may be subject to proprietary measures, including seizure and freezing. Under French procedural law, they may be included in a debtor’s estate and, in principle, seized in the same manner as traditional assets, provided the enforcement authority is able to access the asset, typically through control of the private key or relevant digital wallet. In practice, enforcement remains technically complex, due in particular to pseudonymity, jurisdictional decentralisation and the absence of a custodian in decentralised structures. Seizures are more effective when the crypto-assets are held on centralised platforms subject to French jurisdiction or co-operative foreign platforms. From a criminal law perspective, there is no dedicated offence relating specifically to crypto fraud. Prosecutors rely on existing legal qualifi - cations such as fraud ( escroquerie ), breach of trust ( abus de confiance ) or unauthorised access to an automated data processing system. How - ever, the application of these offences to block - chain-based conduct, such as smart contract manipulation, remains underdeveloped and jurisprudence is still evolving. In some cases, courts have declined to characterise oppor - tunistic smart contract exploitation as criminal,
obligation of confidentiality on credit institutions, finance companies and certain financial service providers. This duty extends to all information related to clients and their transactions. However, the principle is not absolute. Several legal mechanisms allow for the lifting of bank - ing secrecy, particularly in fraud-related matters. French law permits disclosure where explicitly authorised by statute or judicial authority. Nota - bly, the obligation of secrecy may be waived: • in criminal proceedings. Banking secrecy does not preclude judicial requisitions, search and seizure orders or production of docu - ments when authorised by a judge or con - ducted under the supervision of the public prosecutor; • in civil enforcement. Bailiffs ( commissaires de justice ) may request disclosure from banks in the execution of court orders; and • for regulatory purposes. Institutions such as the French anti-money laundering authority (the TRACFIN), the ACPR and tax authorities also benefit from exemptions allowing them to access protected banking information. A breach of banking secrecy remains a criminal offence under Article 226-13 of the French Crim - inal Code and is punishable by imprisonment and fines. However, where statutory exceptions apply, disclosure is not only permissible but compulsory. In practice, fraud litigants may obtain banking records through discovery mechanisms under Article 145 of the French Civil Procedure Code, or by participating as civil parties in criminal proceedings, where investigative powers permit broader access to financial data.
140 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook