You have just received a judgement handed down in your absence. This is known as a default judgment. The law offers you a second chance: the opposition. This allows you to have the case heard by both parties. But beware: this remedy is subject to strict rules on form and reasons. Failure to comply with these rules can permanently deprive you of this right.
1. Methods of bringing cases before the courts
General principle
Article 573 of the Code of Civil Procedure lays down a clear principle: opposition must be lodged in accordance with the rules applicable to legal proceedings before the court that handed down the contested decision.
This general principle is adapted according to the type of jurisdiction concerned.
Specificities before courts with compulsory representation
In courts where representation by a lawyer is compulsory (judicial court for cases over €10,000, court of appeal in most matters), the objection may be lodged by lawyer to lawyer.
In this case, article 575 of the Code of Civil Procedure imposes an additional formality: the lawyer appointed by the defaulting party must declare the opposition to the court secretariat within one month of its formation. This declaration is crucial to the validity of the opposition.
Opposition to Court of Appeal judgments
A specific rule exists for objections lodged against a judgment handed down by a court of appeal in a matter without compulsory representation. Article 573, paragraph 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure specifies that the objection must take the form of a statement sent by registered letter to the court registry.
This statement must contain precise information about the parties and the contested decision. The Cour de cassation requires it to be as informative as a notice of appeal.
2. The obligation to give reasons for the objection
A clear legal requirement
Article 574 of the Code of Civil Procedure is unambiguous: "The opposition must contain the arguments of the defaulting party".
This obligation transforms a previous case law rule into a legal requirement. Its purpose is to avoid dilatory objections and to ensure that the new proceedings are properly debated.
Content of the obligation under case law
Case law has specified the minimum content of this obligation to state reasons.
The Cour de cassation has ruled that a plea in opposition is sufficient where the defaulting party states that he was not duly summoned to appear at the first instance (Civ. 2e, 6 October 1993, no. 89-44.398, Bull. civ. II, no. 280). Although this plea does not concern the merits, it is sufficient.
On the other hand, it censures oppositions that simply state that "the claim is unfounded" without any further explanation (Civ. 2e, 11 April 2013, no. 12-17.174, Bull. civ. II, no. 77). The argument must open up a useful debate.
Opportunity to add to motivation
Case law allows the opposing party to supplement his initial statement of reasons during the opposition proceedings (Com. 13 April 1948, Gaz. Pal. 1948. 1. 239).
This flexibility confirms that the main purpose of the requirement to state reasons is to avoid purely dilatory appeals, without strictly confining the debate to the initial terms of the opposition.
3. Penalties for failure to state reasons
A major doctrinal debate
The sanction for the absence or inadequacy of a statement of reasons has been the subject of debate in doctrine and case law.
There are two opposing approaches:
- Consider this defect to be a breach of form, punishable by nullity (with the requirement of a grievance)
- Treating it as a condition of admissibility, leading to inadmissibility (without the need to demonstrate a grievance)
Current trends in case law
Although the Cour de cassation has not explicitly ruled on this issue, the trend in case law is towards classifying the claim as inadmissible.
This solution seems more consistent with the very nature of the obligation to state reasons. It makes the requirement effective, since it can be raised at any time without the need to demonstrate a grievance.
It is also in line with the case law excluding nullities without a text (Civ. 2e, 10 October 1990, no. 89-15.280, Bull. civ. II, no. 186).
4. Practical advice for a valid objection
Key points to include
To secure your opposition, include at least :
- Precise identification of the contested decision
- Your precise grounds for challenge (preferably on the merits)
- References to supporting documents, where available
If you do not yet have all the information you need to challenge the merits of the case, at least raise the procedural irregularities (failure to issue a summons, etc.).
Mistakes to avoid
Fatal errors include :
- File an objection after the deadline (generally one month from notification)
- Failure to give reasons for opposition
- Formulating pleas that are too vague ("the decision is not justified")
- Neglecting to notify the secretariat when required
Effective strategies
If in doubt, give detailed reasons. Even if case law tolerates a succinct statement of reasons, a well-reasoned objection is more likely to succeed.
Do not hesitate to consult a lawyer as soon as you receive a decision by default. The time limit for lodging an objection is often short, and an error in form or reasoning can permanently deprive you of your right to an adversarial debate.
Opposition is a second chance offered by the law, but this chance must be seized with precision and legal rigour. Legal advice as soon as you receive a default judgment can make all the difference.
Sources
- Articles 573 to 575 of the Code of Civil Procedure
- Civ. 2e, 6 October 1993, no. 89-44.398, Bull. civ. II, no. 280
- Civ. 2e, 11 April 2013, no. 12-17.174, Bull. civ. II, no. 77
- Com. 13 April 1948, Gaz. Pal. 1948. 1. 239
- Civ. 2e, 10 October 1990, no. 89-15.280, Bull. civ. II, no. 186
- M.-E. Boursier and É. Botrel, "Opposition", Répertoire de procédure civile, Dalloz, March 2014.
EN 
FR