A foreign company supplies goods to a French distributor on 90-day payment terms. The invoice goes unpaid. Correspondence produces promises, then silence. By the time the creditor considers formal action, months have elapsed – and French civil procedure rules impose strict deadlines that, once missed, extinguish the right to sue entirely.
Commercial litigation in France is conducted before specialist commercial courts and governed by civil procedure rules derived from the Code de commerce (French commercial code) and the broader civil procedure code. Claims between merchants are heard by the tribunal de commerce (commercial court), composed of elected business judges. With appeals lying to the cour d'appel (court of appeal) and, on points of law, to the Cour de cassation (Supreme Court of France). A commercial claim must typically be filed within five years of the date the claimant knew or ought to have known of the breach. Additionally. Proceedings from first filing to first-instance judgment commonly take between eighteen months and three years.
This page sets out the key instruments, procedural steps, common pitfalls, and cross-border strategic considerations that international businesses need to understand before commencing or defending commercial litigation in France.
The French commercial litigation system: structure and regulatory basis
France maintains a dual court architecture that separates civil and administrative jurisdiction. Commercial disputes between traders – including those involving SARL (société à responsabilité limitée, a private limited liability company) and SAS (société par actions simplifiée. A simplified joint-stock company) entities – fall within the civil court branch, specifically before the tribunal de commerce.
The commercial courts operate in all major French cities. Paris alone has a dedicated commercial court handling a large share of international and high-value disputes. Judges are merchant-elected laypeople, not career magistrates. This produces a commercially pragmatic bench, but also one that can be less predictable than a professional judiciary when evaluating complex financial or technical evidence.
The substantive rules governing commercial disputes derive from several overlapping branches of legislation: commercial legislation, civil legislation, contract law as reformed in recent years, and sector-specific regulatory regimes covering distribution, construction, financial services, and competition. A creditor pursuing a French debtor must identify the correct substantive basis for the claim before drafting the assignation (statement of claim and summons). an error at this stage is rarely correctable without significant cost and delay.
One structural feature that surprises international clients is the absence of disclosure obligations equivalent to common law discovery. French civil procedure does not compel broad pre-trial document production. A party seeking documentary evidence held by the other side must apply for a targeted injonction de produire (order to produce documents). Courts grant these selectively. Parties who build their case assuming the other side will be forced to produce supporting documents routinely find themselves without the evidence they assumed they could obtain.
The limitation period for commercial claims is generally five years under commercial legislation. Shorter periods apply in specific sectors – transport, insurance, and certain financial services disputes carry their own prescription rules. Missing the limitation deadline is fatal: French courts raise prescription of their own motion in some contexts, and a defendant will raise it immediately if the claimant does not. Practitioners in France consistently observe that international clients underestimate how quickly limitation periods accrue when pre-litigation correspondence is conducted informally over months.
Key instruments and procedural steps in French commercial proceedings
French commercial litigation follows a defined procedural sequence. Each stage carries its own documentation requirements, deadlines, and risks. Understanding the sequence before filing reduces cost and improves outcome predictability.
The assignation and service of process. Proceedings commence when the claimant's lawyer drafts an assignation – a document that combines the statement of claim, the legal basis of the claim, and the summons to appear. The assignation is served on the defendant by a huissier de justice (court-appointed bailiff), the officer responsible for official service of process in France. Service must comply with strict formal requirements. Defects in service are a standard line of defence for French defendants and can result in the entire proceeding being declared void.
For claims against foreign defendants or defendants whose registered address is abroad, service must follow the Hague Service Convention or EU service regulation procedures. This adds weeks or months to the process. A claimant who does not account for international service timelines will find the first hearing date arrives before the defendant has been properly served – requiring adjournment and additional cost.
Interim injunctions and conservatory measures. Where there is urgency, a claimant can apply for interim relief before the juge des référés (emergency interim judge). The interim injunction procedure – référé – allows a court to order provisional payment, order delivery of goods, or prohibit a specific act, typically within days of filing. The conditions are urgency, absence of serious dispute as to the legal basis, and proportionality. French courts apply these conditions rigorously. An application that cannot demonstrate genuine urgency will be dismissed, and a failed référé application can alert the defendant to the claimant's strategy before full proceedings are even filed.
Conservatory attachment – saisie conservatoire – allows a creditor to freeze the debtor's bank accounts or assets before obtaining a judgment. This requires a court order obtained without notice to the debtor. The claimant must demonstrate a credible legal basis and a risk that the debtor will dissipate assets. Once obtained, the attachment must be followed by service on the debtor and by full proceedings within a specified period, failing which the attachment lapses. A missed follow-up deadline destroys the attachment and can expose the claimant to a damages claim by the defendant.
The written phase and expert proceedings. French commercial litigation is primarily a written procedure. Each party submits conclusions (written submissions) supported by documentary exhibits. The court appoints a juge de la mise en état (case management judge) in complex matters to supervise the exchange of submissions and set hearing dates. In technical disputes – construction defects, accounting disagreements, product liability – the court may appoint a expert judiciaire (court-appointed expert). The expert's report carries substantial weight. Parties who do not engage actively with the expert phase – submitting detailed technical counter-arguments and attending the expert's meetings – find that the final report reflects only the opposing party's position.
Timelines and cost expectations. A straightforward commercial claim in a regional French commercial court takes between twelve and twenty-four months from filing to first-instance judgment. Paris proceedings in complex matters can extend to three years or more. An appeal to the cour d'appel adds a further twelve to eighteen months. Legal fees in France are charged at hourly rates set by individual practitioners; government fees are relatively modest. Enforcement costs depend on the assets available and the cooperation of the debtor. Claimants should budget for the full enforcement phase – obtaining a judgment is not the same as recovering money.
For international clients considering whether to litigate in France or pursue an alternative, our analysis of international arbitration in France provides a structured comparison of the two paths, including enforceability considerations and confidentiality trade-offs.
To receive an expert assessment of your commercial dispute in France, contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Practical insights and common pitfalls for international clients
International businesses entering French commercial litigation for the first time encounter a procedural culture that differs materially from common law systems and from the practice in many civil law jurisdictions.
Choice of counsel determines procedural outcome. France requires that parties before the tribunal de commerce be represented by a lawyer holding a French barreau (bar) qualification. Foreign lawyers cannot appear independently. Many international clients instruct their home-country lawyer to manage strategy and then engage a local correspondent at a late stage. This division of responsibility frequently produces gaps: the local lawyer lacks the context of the underlying commercial relationship, while the international lawyer lacks procedural authority. The consequence is poorly structured conclusions, missed procedural deadlines, and a case that never fully develops its factual narrative before the court.
The language barrier is a structural risk. All proceedings are conducted in French. Contracts, correspondence, and evidence in other languages must be translated by a sworn translator. The cost of certified translation in complex multi-document cases is substantial. More significantly, the translation process takes time. A claimant who realises at the eve of a submission deadline that key English-language contract documents need certified translation faces either a late filing or an incomplete evidentiary record.
Judgment by default and its limitations. If a defendant served in accordance with the rules fails to appear, the claimant can obtain a judgment by default. French default judgments against defendants who genuinely did not receive service are vulnerable to being set aside on application. A creditor who obtains a default judgment and immediately moves to enforcement may find the judgment challenged and reversed – with the claimant potentially liable for wrongful enforcement costs.
Costs shifting is limited. French courts can order the losing party to pay a contribution to the winning party's legal costs under the article 700 mechanism. In practice, awards under this head are modest relative to actual legal fees incurred. A claimant who wins a commercial dispute in France should not assume full cost recovery. The economics of pursuing a claim – particularly mid-value claims – must account for an irreducible net cost even upon success.
Insolvency of the defendant mid-proceedings. If the defendant enters redressement judiciaire (court-supervised reorganisation) or liquidation judiciaire (judicial liquidation) during proceedings, the litigation is automatically stayed. The claimant must file its claim with the mandataire judiciaire (insolvency administrator) within a strict deadline. typically two months of publication of the insolvency opening – or lose the right to participate in the distribution. International creditors regularly miss this deadline because they are unaware that insolvency publication in France occurs in an official bulletin that most foreign creditors do not monitor. The consequence is extinguishment of the claim against the insolvent estate, regardless of the merits of the underlying dispute.
Practitioners in France consistently note that the gap between formal legal rights and effective recovery is widest in insolvency-adjacent litigation, where procedural compliance by creditors is as important as the substantive merits of their claim.
Cross-border strategy: EU, Portugal, and international enforcement
France's membership of the European Union provides a well-developed set of tools for cross-border enforcement that significantly reduces the cost and delay of recovering on a French judgment within the EU.
EU enforcement mechanisms. A final judgment of a French commercial court is enforceable in other EU member states under EU civil procedure regulations without the need for a separate recognition procedure in the destination state. This means a French judgment against a debtor with assets in Germany, Spain. Alternatively, Portugal can be enforced directly. With the huissier de justice. or the equivalent enforcement officer in the destination state. acting on the French title. The practical consequence is that a French judgment is a valuable enforcement asset if the debtor has multi-jurisdictional assets. The strategic decision whether to litigate in France or another EU jurisdiction should account for where the debtor's assets are actually located.
Portugal-France enforcement corridor. For businesses operating in both the Portuguese and French markets, the EU enforcement regime creates a direct corridor. A judgment obtained in France is enforceable in Portugal through the EU process, and vice versa. Portugal's commercial courts have direct experience with this mechanism. For cross-border disputes involving both jurisdictions, counsel with working knowledge of both systems reduces the coordination cost. Our commercial litigation practice in Portugal applies the same cross-border approach to disputes with a Portuguese dimension.
Enforcement against non-EU defendants. Where the defendant is based outside the EU. in a jurisdiction such as the UK, the US. The UAE. Alternatively, a Latin American country. enforcement of a French judgment requires a recognition procedure in that jurisdiction. The UK's departure from the EU means that enforcement of French judgments in England and Wales no longer benefits from automatic EU mutual recognition. A separate application to the English courts is required. Similarly, enforcement in common law jurisdictions outside Europe requires proceedings that can add twelve months or more to the recovery timeline. International claimants with cross-border debtors should assess enforcement prospects at the outset, not after obtaining judgment.
Arbitration as an alternative to court proceedings. International commercial contracts governed by French law frequently include ICC arbitration clauses or submission to LCIA or SIAC rules. Where such a clause exists and the dispute falls within its scope, the French commercial court lacks jurisdiction. A party who files court proceedings in breach of a valid arbitration clause will face a jurisdictional challenge that suspends proceedings for months. Conversely, where no arbitration clause exists and one party is non-French, arbitration can be agreed post-dispute as a mechanism to avoid the delay of the French court system. The enforceability of an ICC award against French corporate defendants is generally strong, and the Paris seat of arbitration is one of the most frequently chosen globally.
The tax and structuring dimension. Commercial litigation involving French corporate entities – SARL and SAS structures in particular – can have tax implications that affect the economic case for pursuing or settling a claim. Damages awards, settlement payments, and the write-off of irrecoverable debts all have French tax treatment that affects net recovery. Claimants who settle without considering the tax dimension of the payment structure routinely receive less in net economic terms than their initial analysis suggested.
For a detailed review of how French company formation structures affect litigation exposure and asset enforcement, see our guide to company formation in France.
To discuss a cross-border enforcement strategy involving France, reach out to info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Self-assessment checklist before commencing commercial litigation in France
Commercial litigation in France is the appropriate course of action if the following conditions are present:
- The claim arises from a commercial transaction between merchants, or a contract governed by French law, and no binding arbitration clause covers the dispute.
- The limitation period has not expired – confirmed by reference to the applicable commercial or civil legislation for the specific type of claim.
- The defendant is a French-registered entity (SARL, SAS, or other corporate form) or has assets located in France or the EU that are reachable by a French judgment.
- The claim value justifies the anticipated legal costs, translation costs, and enforcement costs – accounting for limited cost recovery even in successful litigation.
- The claimant has documentary evidence sufficient to support a written submission-based procedure, recognising that broad documentary disclosure from the opposing party is not available as of right.
Before filing, verify the following critical points:
- Service requirements: confirm the defendant's current registered address and the applicable service route (domestic or international), including estimated timelines for international service.
- Insolvency check: verify that the defendant is not subject to existing insolvency proceedings, which would require immediate action to file a creditor claim rather than commencing litigation.
- Urgent relief: assess whether interim conservatory attachment or a référé injunction is required to protect the position before full proceedings are underway.
- Expert evidence: identify at the outset whether a technical expert report will be necessary and, if so, engage appropriate technical advisers to participate in the court-appointed expert phase.
- Enforcement jurisdiction: map where the defendant's assets are located and confirm the applicable enforcement route before deciding whether France is the optimal forum for the claim.
The trigger to switch from a direct litigation strategy to an insolvency-adjacent or arbitration-based approach arises when the defendant shows signs of financial distress. Has no attachable assets in France or the EU. Alternatively, when the dispute involves a technical matter where arbitral expertise provides a more reliable outcome than the commercial court's lay judges.
Frequently asked questions
- How long does a commercial court case in France typically take from filing to judgment?
- A first-instance commercial case before the tribunal de commerce typically takes between twelve and twenty-four months for straightforward disputes, and up to three years for complex multi-party or technically intensive matters. An appeal to the cour d'appel adds a further twelve to eighteen months. Claimants should treat total first-instance and appellate proceedings as a two-to-five year process when planning commercial strategy.
- Can a foreign company sue a French business without a French lawyer?
- No. Representation before the French commercial court requires a lawyer qualified at a French barreau. Engaging a lawyer in France with experience in cross-border commercial disputes – and coordinating that local counsel with the client's home-jurisdiction advisers from the outset – is essential to building a coherent case. A law firm in France that understands international commercial relationships can structure the litigation to reflect the full commercial context of the dispute, not just its procedural surface.
- Is a common misconception that winning a judgment in France means the debt is recovered?
- Yes. Obtaining a judgment and recovering money are distinct phases. A French judgment must be enforced by a huissier de justice. Additionally, enforcement depends on locating attachable assets. The defendant's financial condition, and. in cross-border cases. the applicable enforcement procedure in the jurisdiction where assets are located. Defendants who are insolvent or have restructured their assets before enforcement can leave a successful claimant with a judgment but no practical recovery. Assessment of enforcement prospects should be a primary factor in the decision to litigate.
About Ferraz & Whitmore
Ferraz & Whitmore is an international law firm based in Lisbon, advising business clients across 46 jurisdictions. Our commercial litigation practice in France supports international companies, institutional investors. Additionally. In-house legal teams at every stage of French proceedings. from pre-litigation strategy and interim relief applications through to first-instance trial, appeal, and cross-border enforcement. The firm combines Portuguese civil law expertise with English common law tradition, giving our clients a dual perspective that is directly relevant to disputes involving both French civil procedure rules and common law-based enforcement systems. Our attorneys have experience with proceedings before French commercial courts, the cour d'appel, and the Cour de cassation, as well as with ICC arbitration seated in Paris. As an international law firm advising on commercial litigation in France, we coordinate local French counsel, manage cross-border service and enforcement procedures, and provide the strategic oversight that complex multi-jurisdictional disputes require. To explore your legal options for commercial recovery or dispute resolution in France, schedule a consultation at info@ferrazwhitmore.com.
Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. Ferraz & Whitmore assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@ferrazwhitmore.com.