1. Order for Payment Proceedings (‘Injonction de Payer’)
An order for payment proceedings is one of four options when entering into litigation. It is the least costly alternative, however the measure is limited as it can be implemented only in cases where the claims are undisputed. The French collection lawyer will pursue the debtor for an immediate payment of the undisputed sum in a simplified judicial procedure. Your lawyer will be brought to file a request with the Courts including the following elements:
- Elements of personal identity information of claimant
- Elements of personality identity information of defendant
- The facts and legal basis of the request
- A detailed account of the request sum as well as the legal basis for your claims
The procedural laws in France permit the debtor to contest the request with a hired bailiffs
2. Summary Proceedings (‘Procedure de refere’)
If the claim for your payment is challenged, your lawyer has as a second option to request a summary proceeding. This is a popular method for debt collection in large and contentious claims, notably when the defendant’s plea is weaker than the plaintiff’s as the Court is empowered to bypass the hearing and render an expedited decision.
Summary proceedings have three key conditions for applicability: The issue must be an expression of urgency and be either (2) absent a valid challenge or (3) justifiable through the existence of a dispute. The condition of urgency is characterized whenever “a delay in the prescription of the requested measure would be prejudicial to the interests of the plaintiff” and its appreciation is left to the relevant judge. A valid challenge arises when interpretation becomes a significant part of the judge’s decision-making process and is often found in circumstances of disputes in terms of contracts, issues of property rights and/or party intentions.
While summary proceedings may at times grant expedited decisions on certain sensitive cases, the Court may find the presence of relevant dispute sufficient reason to have the lawyer open civil proceeding (‘procedure au fond’)
3. Ordinary Civil Proceedings (‘Procédure au fond’)
Ordinary civil proceedings are typically cited as an alternative option to summary proceedings in cases where the merits are more complex. The judge is brought to rule on both the procedural and legal aspects of the case whereas summary judgements are reserved for specific and urgent issues. However, in order to initiate your procedure on the merits, you must be able to justify the origin of your claim. This can be a contract or an invoice, for example. Note that a simple estimate does not constitute a definite claim.
Within the framework of these ordinary civil proceedings, the judge is brought to rule on all aspects of the case at hand. It is a more complex measure than an order for payment proceedings or a summary ruling and is therefore the costliest alternative. This procedure is useful notably in cases where the debtor contests the existence of the debt in itself as it triggers a fully fledged lawsuit.
A successful end result of an ordinary civil proceeding in debt collection cases is typically the judgement of a writ of summons on the payment notification. A civil proceeding in debt collection goes one of four ways:
1. The case is ruled swiftly and efficiently as the judge rules in favour of a payment notification following the defendant’s (debtor) inability to challenge the existence of the debt.
2. The judge evaluates both sides of the case following a reasonable challenge by the defendant (debtor) of the contested debt’s existence
3. The judge rules in favour of the plaintiff (creditor) through the granting of a writ of execution of payment. The debtor is brought to an immediate reimbursement of the creditor. Failing this, the creditor is empowered to seize the debtor’s contested assets.
4. In a fourth option, the Court may rule in favour of the defendant (debtor) in which case the plaintiff (creditor) retains the right to appeal.
It is important to be attentive to the statute of limitations which in France is limited to 5 years for a commercial entity and 2 years for an average consumer. Once a certain period of time has passed the debtor can no longer be held liable under a payment notification.
5. European Order for Payment Proceedings (‘L’Ordonnance d’Injonction de Payer Européenne’)
The European Order or Payment Proceedings may exist as a fourth option for debt recovery in the case of an undisputed cross-border claim. This option is a low-cost and simplified option for debt collection lawyers and is available to all european citizens, with the noted exception of Denmark in which the procedure is inapplicable. The european-level proceeding can be applied to both civil and commercial matters. Like the other proceedings seen above, the debt studied by the courts must find its source within a written formalized contract.
The competent court in these proceedings is typically that of the defendant’s place of residence but can be modified by the judge based on convincing evidence brought by the plaintiff. The court issues a European Order for Payment, enforceable throughout the EU within a 30 day delay. The European order for payment shall be served on the defendant in accordance with the provisions of the national law of the State where the service is to be effected. The order becomes enforceable unless the defendant filed for appeal within the allocated time limit.
Once the order for payment has been declared enforceable it remains so in any state of the European Union, without any prior recognition procedure necessary. This exist therefore as a valuable alternative for your collection lawyer as its process is both time and cost efficient.
