Mastering the procedure before the enforcement judge (JEX) is a decisive asset in winning your case. This specialised courtcreated by the law of 9 July 1991, deals with all enforcement disputes. Its procedure is governed by specific rules that should be familiarised with to avoid any risk of inadmissibility.
Initiation of proceedings
Assignment as the main mode
Since decree no. 96-1130 of 18 December 1996, cases are referred to the JEX by writ of summons.
This summons must contain, under penalty of nullity :
- The standard wording of articles 56 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure
- Reproduction of articles R. 121-6 to R. 121-10 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures
The document is then registered with the registry.
Crucial point: the matter is referred to the JEX when the document is served and not when it is registered (Opinion of the Court of Cassation of 15 June 1998).
For proceedings commenced after 1 January 2020, the summons must also specify the conditions under which the defendant will be represented, subject to the same penalty of nullity (article R. 121-11 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures).
Notable exceptions
The eviction procedure is simplified. Under article R. 442-2 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures, a claim may be lodged by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt or by declaration made or delivered against a receipt.
In some cases, such as when disputing a seizure for payment, additional formalities are required. For example, the dispute must be notified to the bailiff on the same day that the matter is referred to the JEX or, at the latest, on the next working day. If this is not done, the claim will be deemed inadmissible ex officio (Civ. 2e, 20 January 2011, no. 10-10.768).
Assistance and representation
Mandatory representation from 2020
Law no. 2019-222 of 23 March 2019 has changed the rules by making representation by a lawyer before the JEX compulsory. This obligation applies to all proceedings brought from 1 January 2020.
Limited exceptions
Article L. 121-4 of the French Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures provides for two major exceptions to this obligation:
- Applications relating to eviction
- Disputes involving claims of less than €10,000
In such cases, the parties may be represented by :
- A lawyer
- Their spouse or civil-union partner
- A relative or ally in a direct or collateral line (up to the 3rd degree)
- A person exclusively attached to their personal service or to their company
The State and local authorities may be represented by an official or agent of their administration, even when the claim exceeds €10,000 (Avis Civ. 2e, 18 February 2021, no. 20-70.006).
For the seizure of wages, a specific system authorises representation by a lawyer, a local official or a proxy with power of attorney (Article L. 3252-11 of the French Labour Code).
The oral nature of the procedure
A principle with some flexibility
Article R. 121-8 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures sets out the principle of an oral procedure. However, this oral nature has gradually been relaxed.
Decree no. 2010-1165 of 1 October 2010 authorises the parties to refer to claims and arguments formulated in writing. Article R. 121-9 of the same code allows the judge to exempt a party from attending a subsequent hearing, if it so requests.
The exchange is then made by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt or by notification between lawyers. Similarly, article R. 121-10 authorises the presentation of arguments by letter addressed to the JEX, provided that it can be proved that the opposing party was aware of them before the hearing.
Effective preparation for the operation
To make the most of an oral presentation, I invite our clients to :
- Structure their argument around key points
- Use summary written notes
- Anticipating the judge's questions
- Focus on the essential factual and legal elements
Clarity and concision remain the watchwords of successful advocacy.
The JEX's decision
Notification and immediate enforcement
The parties are notified of the JEX's reasoned judgment by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt (article R. 121-15 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures). This notification sets in motion the 15-day appeal period.
An important feature is that JEX decisions are enforceable as soon as they are notified, the appeal and the time limit for appeal having no suspensive effect (article R. 121-21). This rule can have dramatic consequences for the losing party.
Unless otherwise stipulated, the decision of the JEX has the force of res judicata in the main proceedings (article R. 121-14). It may rule on costs and apply article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
If an enforcement measure is discharged, proceedings are suspended as soon as the decision is handed down, but the effect of unavailability is not removed until after the decision has been notified (article R. 121-18).
To compensate for the lack of suspensive effect of the appeal, article R. 121-22 provides for the possibility of applying to the First President of the Court of Appeal for a stay of execution. This application suspends the proceedings until the First President has given a ruling.
Maximising your chances of success
Success before the JEX requires a rigorous process strategy. Our advice:
- Carefully check the conditions of territorial jurisdiction and attribution
- Strict compliance with deadlines and formalities
- Anticipating opposing arguments
- Prepare clear and precise conclusions
- Ensure that all the necessary supporting documents are present
Given the speed of this procedure and its technical nature, the assistance of a specialist lawyer is often decisive, even in cases where it is not compulsory.
Our firm offers a personalised analysis of your case. Do not hesitate to contact us for optimise your litigation strategy before the JEX.
Sources
- Code of civil enforcement procedures, articles L. 121-4, R. 121-6 to R. 121-22, R. 442-2
- Code of Judicial Organisation, article L. 213-6
- Law no. 2019-222 of 23 March 2019 on programming 2018-2022 and reform for the justice system
- Decree no. 96-1130 of 18 December 1996
- Decree no. 2010-1165 of 1 October 2010
- Civ. 2e, 20 January 2011, no. 10-10.768
- Civ. 2nd opinion, 18 February 2021, no. 20-70.006
- Opinion of the Court of Cassation of 15 June 1998
EN 
FR