The enforcement judge, or JEX, is the magistrate at the heart of civil enforcement proceedings. His intervention is often the last resort for a creditor seeking payment of his debt, or for a debtor wishing to defend his rights against an attachment order. It is therefore essential to understand their role, their remit and the applicable procedures. Navigating these technical procedures requires precise knowledge, and the assistance of a lawyer specialising in enforcement procedures is often essential. This article provides an overview of this judicial function, from its origins to its most recent developments.
Introduction to the Enforcement Judge (JEX): history and fundamental role
Before the introduction of the Enforcement Judge, enforcement litigation was spread across several jurisdictions, a situation that gave rise to complexity and legal uncertainty. The need to centralise these disputes to improve efficiency led to the creation of a specialised function.
From dispersion to specialisation of the JEX
The Law of 9 July 1991 officially created the Enforcement Judge, giving him exclusive jurisdiction to settle disputes relating to the enforcement of court decisions. This centralising trend has continued, particularly with the 2006 reform, which transferred the seizure of property to the Enforcement Judge. More recently, a trend towards diversion is changing the landscape, as illustrated by the transfer of the attachment of earnings procedure to the judicial commissioners, which will become fully effective on 1 July 2025.
Status and organisation of the JEX within the judicial court
The Enforcement Judge is not an autonomous court, but a specialised function exercised within the judicial court. The way it is organised guarantees both its technical nature and its integration into the judicial system.
The JEX: a single judge, delegated within the judicial court
The function of Enforcement Judge is exercised by the President of the Judicial Court, who in principle rules as a single judge. However, he may delegate this function to one or more other judges of the court by means of an order that constitutes a measure of judicial administration aimed at guaranteeing the proper functioning of the public service of justice. This decision specifies the duration and geographical scope of the delegated judge's powers.
Referral to a panel and the role of the court registry
When faced with a particularly complex case, the JEX has the option of referring it to the collegiate court. This panel is made up of three judges and acts as an Enforcement Judge. The clerk's office of the JEX is that of the judicial court, ensuring administrative follow-up of cases.
Jurisdiction of the JEX: a broad area of public policy
The powers of the JEX are precisely defined by law and are a matter of public policy. This means that the parties cannot derogate from them and that any other judge must declare himself incompetent if a case falls within the jurisdiction of the JEX.
Public order jurisdiction and procedural incidents
The public policy nature of the JEX's powers has one major consequence: any court hearing a dispute relating to a compulsory enforcement measure must declare that it does not have jurisdiction. In the event of an appeal against a decision on this point, the court of appeal has full jurisdiction to hear the case on its merits, thereby avoiding prolonging the proceedings.
Exclusions from the jurisdiction of the JEX: boundaries with the administrative and criminal orders
The JEX's remit is strictly limited to the judicial system. It therefore has no jurisdiction over disputes that come under the administrative jurisdiction, such as disputes over the validity of a tax claim. Similarly, it cannot intervene in the enforcement of criminal decisions, the monitoring of which is sometimes the responsibility of the public prosecutor and which are governed by the rules of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A decision by the Conseil Constitutionnel (QPC no. 2023-1068 of 17 November 2023) also declared unconstitutional the fact that the debtor could not contest the amount of the upset price at the time of the compulsory sale of his shares, introducing a transitional period until 1 December 2024.
The JEX and enforcement measures: an ancillary dispute
The JEX's intervention is generally triggered by the initiation of a enforcement measuresuch as an attachment for payment. A simple summons to pay, an act preparatory to the seizure for sale, is sufficient to give the court jurisdiction. The court cannot be asked to interpret a writ of execution when the measure has not yet been enforced, nor can it annul a court decision that has the force of res judicata.
Specific powers of the JEX: from execution on movables to distribution of funds
The Enforcement Judge has a wide range of powers covering all the stages and disputes involved in enforced debt collection.
Problems relating to enforceable titles and claims
The JEX examines the legality and existence of the writ of execution. While it cannot amend the terms of the writ, it can interpret its meaning, rule on its limitation period or grant periods of grace. It also has jurisdiction to rule on disputes relating to the debt: its amount, due date or liquidity. Lastly, it can order or pay a penalty to force a party to perform an obligation.
Foreclosure and precautionary measures: a central role
The extended jurisdiction of the JEX in matters of seizure of property, including the orientation hearing and the sale, is a pillar of its function, in accordance with the principle of "fairness". foreclosure procedure rigorous. He is also the judge who authorises precautionary measures, such as a provisional mortgage, when a creditor without an enforceable title fears for the recovery of his debt.
Claims for compensation and distribution of funds
The JEX hears actions for damages based on harmful performance or non-performance or abusive resistance. Its jurisdiction also extends to procedures for distributing fundsThis will ensure that the seized funds are distributed fairly among the various creditors.
Proceedings before the JEX: ordinary rules and special features
Proceedings before the Enforcement Judge are governed by the general rules of the Code of Civil Procedure, but with specific features tailored to the urgency of enforcement disputes.
Proceedings before the JEX: referral, representation and orality
Apart from a few exceptions, proceedings are initiated by a writ of summons. Since a decree reforming civil procedure came into force on 1 January 2020, representation by a lawyer has become compulsory in the majority of cases. In principle, proceedings are oral, which means that arguments are presented orally at the hearing, although they are often supported by written submissions.
The JEX's decision and appeal procedures
Judgments of the JEX are enforceable by operation of law as soon as they are notified; this is known as provisional enforcement by operation of law. It is essential to note that, barring exceptions, the appeal has no suspensive effect against a decision of the JEX means that enforcement may continue despite the appeal. However, a party may apply to the first president of the court of appeal for a stay of execution if it has serious grounds for doing so.
Special procedures: from obstacles to enforcement to proceedings on application
When a commissioner of justice encounters performance difficultiesIn this case, he can refer the matter to the JEX for a ruling. There is also a non-adversarial application procedure for cases where authorisation must be obtained quickly without the other party being informed, for example to carry out a protective seizure.
Impact of recent reforms and outlook for the JEX
The role of the Enforcement Judge is constantly evolving, marked by reforms aimed both at simplifying procedures and redefining the boundaries of his intervention.
The diversion of the seizure of wages and its implications
From 1 July 2025, the procedure for seizure of remuneration will be entirely entrusted to the judicial commissioners. The JEX will only intervene in the event of a dispute. The aim of this reform is to relieve congestion in the courts, but it raises questions about debtors' access to the courts and the implementation of the new formalities (payment order, digital register).
QPC and changes to the limits of the JEX's powers
Case law, particularly that of the Cour de cassation, continues to shape the scope of action of the JEX, as illustrated by the QPC decision on the forced sale of intangible rights. At the same time, there have been transfers of jurisdiction, particularly in the area of over-indebtedness, which is now dealt with by the protection litigation judge. Although this area has been transferred, the JEX is still faced with its implications, particularly when the good faith of the debtor in a situation of over-indebtedness is examined as part of an enforcement action.
Protection of the debtor and responsibilities of the parties to the enforcement proceedings
The protection of the debtor remains a central concern, through the principle of the unseizability of certain assets. Compensatory allowance is in principle exempt from seizure due to its maintenance nature, although case law allows for exceptions. In addition, creditors, particularly banks, can be held liable for failing in their duty to warn or for errors such as an incorrect APR, which can affect the validity of the claim, in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code.
In view of the complexity of the JEX's powers and the remedies available, recourse to a lawyer specialising in enforcement procedures enables you to secure your rights and optimise your procedural strategy. Our firm is at your disposal to analyse your situation.
Frequently asked questions
What is the Enforcement Judge (JEX)?
The Enforcement Judge is a specialised magistrate of the judicial court whose main task is to settle disputes and disagreements that arise during the enforcement of court decisions and other enforceable titles.
When should a case be referred to the JEX?
A case must be brought before a court if a dispute arises during an enforcement procedure. This could be a dispute over the validity of a seizure, a request for a delay in payment following a summons, or a dispute over the seizability of an asset.
Do I have to be represented by a lawyer before the JEX?
Yes, since a 2019 decree, representation by a lawyer has become the principle before the Enforcement Judge. There are exceptions, in particular for eviction proceedings or when the debt is less than €10,000.
Can the JEX cancel a debt?
No, the JEX cannot cancel a debt or modify the court decision establishing it. The JEX's role is limited to enforcement disputes: it can grant an extension, cancel an irregular seizure or rule on the statute of limitations, but it cannot call into question the original decision, which has the force of res judicata.
Does an appeal against a JEX decision suspend the seizure?
No, an appeal against a decision by the enforcement judge does not have suspensive effect. This immediate effect means that the enforcement measure (for example, a seizure) can continue despite the appeal. To stop it, a specific "stay of execution" decision must be obtained from the First President of the Court of Appeal.
What impact will the 2025 reform have on the attachment of wages?
From 1 July 2025, the attachment of earnings procedure will be "diversified". It will be managed entirely by the judicial commissioners. The JEX will only intervene to settle any disputes raised by the debtor or creditor.
EN 
FR