Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Titles in France

Although French law does not grant a general “pre-enforcement discovery, there are several lawful means to gather useful information prior to initiating recognition (« exequatur ») and enforcement measures 

Identification of the Debtor: Registre du commerce et des sociétés (RCS) – via Infogreffe or INPI delivers Company certificate (“K-bis Extracts”) : Legal name, registered office, corporate form, share capital, managers, main filings : useful to confirm party identity for enforcement and service.

Financial Information: France does not have broad public access to ongoing financial accounts, but Annual accounts are filed with RCS (Balance sheet, P&L, annex). Some companies may use confidentiality regime.

Notices of insolvency proceedings, mergers, transfers, pledges.

Bank accounts: Bailiffs can request information (existing bank accounts) from the National Register of Bank Accounts and Similar Accounts (“FICOBA”) in the event of a court decision (ex part order) authorizing a conservatory seizure of bank accounts.

Credit investigation services such as Dun & Bradstreet, Coface, etc. (private sector).

Real Property (Immovable): Information can be found with the Service de la publicité foncière (“SPF”) : ownership, mortgages & liens. It requires identifying the debtor precisely;.

Insolvency Status: possible to check whether the debtor is subject to bankruptcy proceedings : Sauvegarde, Redressement judiciaire or Liquidation judiciaire.

No enforcement steps can be taken on the basis of a non-recognized judgment in France. Interim measures, on the other hand, are available on the basis of a non-recognized foreign judgment. 

As a general rule, a creditor needs to petition for the authorization of a judge to place an interim measure on his debtors’ assets. Article L511-2 of the code of civil enforcement procedure provides that prior authorization from a judge is not required if the creditor is relying on an enforceable title or a court decision that is not yet enforceable. This includes non-recognized foreign judgments.

The exequatur procedure is gradually being phased out in European Union law for judgments rendered within the European Union and enforced in another member state.

The principle for European states is the simplified circulation of judgments. Several European regulations govern the jurisdiction, recognition, and enforcement of judgments in various specific areas:

• Brussels II Bis Regulation for matrimonial matters and parental responsibility, as well as international child abduction.
• Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of December 18, 2008, regarding maintenance obligations.
• Regulation (EU) No 650/2013 of July 4, 2021, regarding international successions.
• Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of December 12, 2012, regarding civil and commercial matters.

As regards, the Brussels I Bis Regulation also provides for the recognition of decisions of member states in other member states without any particular procedure required. Articles 45 and 46 provide the same limitations as Brussels II Bis for refusal of recognition (conflict with public policy, irreconcilable decision against the same parties on the same action, procedural defects in service or notification of introductory writs, etc.).

The conditions for the application of the Brussels I bis Regulation pertain firstly to the nature of the case, which must be civil or commercial, and secondly, a judgment must be obtained. Following this, the bailiff will be able to directly enforce the decision in the relevant country.

However, although the exequatur procedure tends to disappear gradually within the EU, exceptions remain. Some matters are not covered by the automatic enforceability provided by the aforementioned regulations (e.g., status and capacity of natural persons, social security, etc.). Moreover, it is still possible to contest the recognition enforcement of the foreign decision before the courts of the country where it is requested (chapter 7).

In the presence of an international convention:

Some foreign states have entered into conventions with France to allow for the recognition of foreign judgments within the French territory. The list of states bound with France by an international convention regarding the recognition of foreign judgments can be found on the website of the Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs: https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/

These international conventions regulate the procedures for recognizing foreign judgments in France. Signatory states are bound by the provisions of these conventions, which define:

• conditions and limitations for the recognition of a foreign judgment.
• the procedure to have the said judgment recognized.

For example, the Lugano Convention of October 30, 2007, concerning jurisdiction, recognition, and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (between the Swiss Confederation, the Eu, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Kingdom of Norway, and the Republic of Iceland), stipulates in Article 33-1 that judgments rendered by a state bound by this convention are recognized in other states without any additional procedures being necessary. Grounds for non-recognition include conflict with the public policy of the state, failure of timely notification, or an irreconcilable decision rendered between the same parties.

In the absence of an international convention:

Conditions for the recognition of a foreign judgement are set only by caselaw. In France, the landmark decision is the Cornelissen ruling (Civ, 1ère, February 20, 2007, n°05-14.082), which imposes three cumulative conditions for the recognition of a foreign judgment:

1. Competence of the foreign court: The court that rendered the decision must be competent. This competence is recognized if the dispute is significantly connected to the foreign state and if no French court has exclusive jurisdiction.
2. Conformity with international public policy: The decision must not contravene fundamental principles of the French legal system, including domestic law, EU law, and international conventions such as the European Convention on Human Rights. A decision contrary to international public policy has no effect in France, except in cases where partial exequatur may be granted.
3. Absence of fraud: Simitch case (1ère civ, February 6, 1985), the Cour de cassation requires the absence of fraud to recognize a foreign decision. This includes the absence of fraudulent conduct, attempts to circumvent legislative provisions, and avoidance of mandatory provisions.

Process for requesting exequatur:

Unless otherwise set in on international Convention to obtain exequatur, the competent civil court must be seized by summons (or joint petition). The procedure is adversarial and allows for appeal of the decision.

The Tribunal judiciaire has exclusive jurisdiction to grant exequatur for a judgment rendered abroad (art. R-212-8, 2 of the Code of Judicial Organization). The plaintiff must, in principle, bring the summon to the judicial tribunal in the district where the defendant resides (Art. 42 of the French Code of Civil Procedure). If the defendant's domicile or residence is unknown, the plaintiff may seize the tribunal of his own domicile in France or any other tribunal if he resides abroad.

Once the decision on exequatur becomes final, the foreign judgment becomes an enforceable title in France (art. L111-3 of the Code of Civil Procedure).

The exequatur procedure (for non-EU judgment) is a judicial process, which generally implies that it can be quite lengthy. Depending on the jurisdiction involved, it can be relatively swift, taking around six months, but it can also extend over a period of one year when the defendant raise serious issues to reject the exequatur.

Estimating the cost of such an exequatur procedure is also complex, as numerous variables can influence expenses, potentially doubling the initial cost. However, several fees must be taken into account:

• The fees of a sworn translator if the judgment or foreign document to be executed is not in French.
• The fees of the bailiff responsible for serving the summons,
• The administration fees of the court
• The fees of the lawyers representing the claimer before the court,

Therefore, in conclusion, an exequatur procedure implies fees and costs of a minimum 4,000 / 10,000 euros.

There are several situations in which a judgment from a Member State of the European Union can be prevented from being recognized or enforced in France. In accordance with Articles 45 and 46 of the Brussels I bis Regulation, this foreign judgment must not:

• Contravene the international public policy of the State, meaning the French concept of public policy.
• Has not been properly served to the defendant at the starting of the proceedings.
• Is incompatible with a prior judgment rendered in another Member State (or a non-member state) involving the same parties and the same cause of action, or
• Is incompatible with an internal decision rendered in France between some parties.

The recognition of a foreign judgment issued by a Court from a non-European Union Member State can be contested with reference to the Cornelissen ruling (see above).

Finally, once the exequatur of the decision is recognized, it is necessary to seize a judicial officer to proceed with its enforcement. In accordance with Articles L.111-3,2° and L.111-4 of the French Code of Civil Procedure on enforcement, the parties have a period of 10 years to enforce their decision, failing which it will no longer produce any effects.

A foreign judgment can only be recognized in France if it remains enforceable in the country of origin ; if enforcement is already time-barred there, recognition will be refused. 

There is no limitation period for initiating exequatur proceedings under French law. The French Supreme Court confirmed this in a decision of 11 January 2023 (1° ch. Civ. n° 21-21.168).

Once a foreign judgment becomes enforceable in France—either automatically under the Brussels I Recast Regulation or after an exequatur order—its enforcement is subject to the 10-year limitation period applicable to French judgments, which resets with each enforcement act.

Yes. Bailiff service costs, lawyer fees (when subject to article 700 French code of procedure) and translation costs.

Once a foreign judgment is enforceable in France (either automatically for EU judgments or via exequatur for non-EU judgments), the creditor can access to the full range of French civil enforcement mechanisms. Enforcement is carried out through a bailiff (“commissaire de justice” new name of “huissier”). 

Creditors can initiate direct measures against bank accounts, receivables and other financial claims. One of the most effective tools is the freezing and appropriation of bank funds through a seizure served on French banking institutions. The bailiff may first obtain information from the FICOBA register, which identifies all bank accounts held in France by the debtor. 

Receivables owed to the debtor by third parties, such as clients or insurers, may likewise be seized via a “third-party seizure”. The garnished third party must formally declare the existence and amount of any debt (even future or conditional debt), failing which it may incur liability.

Enforcement is also possible against wages or salaries, although this form of seizure follows a specific statutory regime and is subject to protective thresholds intended to preserve the debtor’s minimum subsistence.

Movable assets such as vehicles, inventory, furniture or equipment may be seized and subsequently sold by public auction to satisfy the debt.

If the debtor owns real estate in France, a judicial sale may be initiated, which entails publication requirements, judicial supervision and ultimately a court-approved auction.

Finally, once recognition has been granted, conservatory measures may be converted into final measures without the need for further judicial intervention.

As soon as insolvency proceedings are opened by a French court—whether safeguard (sauvegarde), judicial reorganization (redressement judiciaire), or liquidation (liquidation judiciaire)—all individual enforcement measures against the debtor are automatically stayed, and no new enforcement action may be initiated. The creditor holding a foreign judgment that has been recognized in France must then shift to the collective regime.

The creditor will file a statement of claim (déclaration de créance) with the court-appointed judicial representative (“Mandataire Judiciaire” aka Représentant des créanciers”) within the statutory bar date (2 months from the publication of the bankruptcy judgment, extended by 2 months for foreign creditors) .

The recognized foreign judgment enables the creditor to establish the existence, nature and amount of its claim without having to re-litigate the merits. The claim is then examined, verified and, where necessary, contested through the insolvency verification procedure.

France is a signatory to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards dated June 10, 1958. In addition, the French Code of Civil Procedure provides a complete set of rules regarding enforcement of foreign awards.

Exequatur Order: The conditions for recognizing and enforcing foreign arbitral awards are outlined in Article 1514 of the French Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which states that "arbitral awards are recognized or enforced in France if their existence is proven by the party relying on them and if such recognition or enforcement does not manifestly contravene international public policy."

Hence, besides demonstrating the existence of the arbitral foreign award, which typically poses no issue (original hard copy + translation in French), the court primarily assesses whether the award does not contradict the fundamental principles of international public policy, akin to the scrutiny of foreign judicial decisions. There exists case law on this matter, with French courts, for instance, refusing to recognize an arbitral award enforcing a contract involving bribery or influence peddling.

The exequatur proceedings is an ex-parte one. The judge (of the Tribunal Judiciaire of Paris for foreign awards) can either grant or deny exequatur. Partial exequatur is permitted by case law, provided that the various aspects of the ruling are not indivisible. The exequatur judge cannot alter the content of the award or add to its provisions.

Effects of the Exequatur Order: The arbitral award, upon issuance, constitutes a judicial decision with the authority of res judicata. The state judge's role is limited to granting enforceability to the award. By affixing the enforcement formula to the award, the exequatur order enables the implementation of various enforcement procedures, such as bank account seizures or third-party seizure (see above).

Appeal of the Exequatur Order: A foreign arbitral award cannot be subject to an appeal or annulment. It is only possible to challenge the order that grants or denies the exequatur.

The decision that rules on a request for recognition or exequatur of a foreign arbitral award is subject to appeal to the competent Court of Appeal (article 1525 CPC). The appeal must be filed within one month from the notification of the decision. However, the parties may agree on another method of notification when the appeal is against the award that has been granted exequatur. Appeal against such decision does not suspend the enforcement of the exequatured arbitral award.

Grounds for the court of appeal to refuse the exequatur: Article 1525 CPC states that "The Court of Appeal may only refuse to recognize or enforce an arbitral award in the cases provided for in Article 1520." According to Article 1520 CPC, there are only five specific cases:

• The arbitral tribunal wrongly declared itself competent or incompetent; or
• The arbitral tribunal was improperly constituted; or
• The arbitral tribunal ruled without adhering to the mandate conferred upon it; or
• The principle of adversarial proceedings was not respected; or
• The recognition or enforcement of the award is contrary to international public policy.