In civil procedure, acquiescence is a legal act with radical consequences that is often misunderstood. It involves a party to a lawsuit acknowledging his opponent's claims or accepting a court decision, thereby giving up the right to continue the debate. This approach, which may seem like a simple admission of defeat, is in fact a strategic tool that must be carefully thought through. If used incorrectly, it can result in the loss of essential rights; if used correctly, it can put a definitive end to a dispute. This article summarises the definitions, conditions and effects of acquiescence, a fundamental mechanism of procedural law. The complexity of its implications underlines the importance of being accompanied by a expert lawyer in civil procedure to help you make the right decisions.
I. Definition and basic distinctions of acquiescence in civil procedure
Legal definition of acquiescence and its scope
Acquiescence is a unilateral legal act by which a litigant accepts the claim made against him or a judgment already rendered. As a unilateral act, it produces its effects solely through the will of its author, without requiring the acceptance of the opposing party. It is an expression of will that has the effect of extinguishing the dispute or closing the appeal channels. Its scope is therefore considerable, as it expresses a waiver of the right to contest a right or a decision.
Acquiescence to the claim vs. acquiescence to the judgment: the foundations of the Code of Civil Procedure
The Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) distinguishes between two main forms of acquiescence. Firstly, acquiescence to the claim, provided for in article 408 of the CPC, is the act by which the defendant acknowledges the validity of his opponent's claims. This is a serious act because it entails a waiver of the action itself, i.e. the right to contest the claim in court. Secondly, acquiescence in the judgment, defined in article 409 of the CPC, consists of the party who has lost the case submitting to the provisions of the decision. Its main effect is to waive the right to appeal.
Distinction from related concepts: withdrawal, settlement, admission, consent judgment
It is important not to confuse acquiescence with other procedural acts. The distinction with related concepts Like discontinuance, settlement or admission, acquiescence is fundamental to understanding its exact scope. Unlike the withdrawal of proceedings, which does not extinguish the action and often requires the agreement of the opponent, acquiescence is a unilateral act with more far-reaching effects. It also differs from a settlement, which is a contract involving mutual concessions between the parties to put an end to a dispute. Finally, a confession is merely a form of evidence, whereas an acquiescence is an act that puts an end to the legal debate.
Impact of criminal proceedings on civil acquiescence
Although civil and criminal proceedings are separate, they can sometimes interact. In specific areas, such as press law, acquiescence in a civil judgment may have the effect of halting criminal proceedings for the same facts. Conversely, the fact that a guarantee fund has brought a civil action before a criminal court does not mean that it has acquiesced in a compensation decision handed down by a civil commission, demonstrating that the two spheres are not automatically one and the same.
II. Conditions for the validity of the will to acquiesce in procedural law
Consent: free, informed and free from defects (error, fraud, violence)
To be valid, acquiescence must be the result of consent free, enlightened and without vices. As with any legal act, error, fraud or violence (see articles 1130 et seq. of the Civil Code) can lead to its annulment. A party who acquiesces in the mistaken belief that a judgment is enforceable or not subject to appeal may thus invoke error to have the act annulled. However, judges have the power to assess these defects, taking into account the quality of the parties, particularly if they were assisted by counsel.
Conditions and reservations: full willingness to acquiesce
Acquiescence must reflect a certain and unequivocal will. It may be subject to conditions, but its very existence will depend on these conditions being met. It is also possible to express reservations. For example, executing a decision while expressly reserving the right to appeal does not qualify as acquiescence. Without this certainty, judges will refuse to recognise the existence of acquiescence.
Capacity and power of acquiescence: minors, protected adults and authorised representatives
As acquiescence is an act of disposal, the person making it must have the legal capacity to dispose of his or her rights. Protected adults (under guardianship or curatorship) and minors are subject to strict rules. The guardian must obtain authorisation from the judge to act on behalf of the protected person. Lawyers, on the other hand, are deemed to have received special authority to acquiesce on behalf of their clients by virtue of their legal representation mandate, but this authority cannot exceed that of their clients. Case law is consistent on this point, with a ruling by the First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation in December 2021.
Matters in which acquiescence is authorised or prohibited: principle and exceptions
In principle, acquiescence is possible for all rights that are freely available to a party. However, it is not possible in all matters. Acquiescence to the claim is prohibited for rights that are not freely available to the parties, i.e. those that concern public policy, such as personal status or filiation, which are matters of civil status. On the other hand, acquiescence in the judgment is always permitted in principle, as the prior review of a judge is considered a guarantee. However, the law does provide for exceptions, for example in the case of a divorce decree concerning a protected adult.
III. Forms of acquiescence: express or implied in civil procedure
Express acquiescence: certain intention and forms of manifestation
Acquiescence is said to be express when the author's intention is made clear and unambiguous. No particular formalism is required: it may be expressed in writing, in a simple letter or in a statement made in court and acknowledged by the judge. What is essential is that the intention to waive the right to contest is certain. Even a lawyer's submissions that have been declared inadmissible from a procedural point of view may be accepted as evidence of acquiescence if they unequivocally express this will (see for example Civ. 2e, 3 September 2015, Bull. civ. II, no. 245, ed. Dalloz).
Implied acquiescence: the requirement of unequivocal intent and the role of the judge
Acquiescence may also be implied, i.e. inferred from acts or facts that clearly demonstrate the party's intention to accept the claim or judgment. This intention cannot be presumed and must be unequivocal. The assessment of this intention falls within the sovereign power of the trial judges, who examine the circumstances of each case. For example, the simple fact of not appearing or of deferring to the court is not generally considered to be acquiescence.
Legal acquiescence: unreserved enforcement of an unenforceable judgment
The Code of Civil Procedure provides for a specific case of implicit acquiescence: unconditional enforcement of an unenforceable judgment. Three cumulative conditions must be met: voluntary execution, a judgment that is not yet enforceable, and unconditional execution. In this case, the law presumes the intention to acquiesce, and the judge does not have to investigate the real will of the party. On the other hand, case law has made it clear that payment of costs or a procedural indemnity alone no longer constitutes acquiescence (since a reversal in November 1994, confirmed by Civ. 2e, 23 March 2023, Bull. civ. II, no. 58).
Voluntary acquiescence: prosecutions, receipt of convictions and settlement agreements
Apart from the legal case, other behaviours may reflect an implicit intention to acquiesce. For example, a party who has won the case and who takes legal action to enforce the judgment is expressing an intention to acquiesce in the decision. Similarly, the creditor's unreserved acceptance of payment of the sums awarded by the judgment may be interpreted as acquiescence. The conclusion of a settlement agreement on the basis of the judgment is also a strong indication.
IV. The legal effects of acquiescence and their scope
Effects of acquiescence in the claim: recognition of the merits and termination of the action
Acquiescence in a claim has radical effects: it implies recognition of the merits of the opponent's claim and a waiver of the right to take legal action. This means that the party who has acquiesced will never again be able to contest this right in court. The proceedings are extinguished and the subject of the dispute is definitively closed on this point. For the defendant, this is the equivalent of the plaintiff discontinuing the action.
Effects of acquiescence in the judgment: submission and waiver of rights of appeal
The most significant effect of acquiescence to the judgment is submission to the heads of the decision, which entails a irrevocable waiver of rights of appeal ordinary and extraordinary, thus conferring on the judgment an anticipated res judicata effect between the parties. The party who acquiesces thereby forfeits his right to appeal or to lodge an appeal in cassation. In principle, this waiver is final. However, the law provides for an exception: if the opposing party itself lodges an appeal after the acquiescence, the acquiescing party regains his right to lodge a cross-appeal.
Scope of effects: vis-à-vis the parties (multiple, indivisible, joint and several), third parties, surety and guarantor
In principle, an acquiescence only has effect in relation to the party who made it. If several persons are parties to the proceedings, the acquiescence of one does not bind the others, unless the dispute is indivisible. Thus, in the case of joint and several liability, the acquiescence of one co-debtor does not prevent the others from continuing with the litigation. Similarly, a guarantor is not bound by the acquiescence of the principal debtor. Heirs, on the other hand, are bound by the acquiescence of their heir. In practice, notification of the acquiescence by a bailiff may be necessary in order to officially inform third parties or to proceed with compulsory execution on the uncontested points.
V. Further developments and current case law on acquiescence
Detailed comparative analysis of recent developments in the case law on tacit acquiescence
Case law is constantly refining the contours of implied acquiescence, particularly tacit acquiescence. Recent decisions show a tendency for judges to require increasingly rigorous demonstration of the unequivocal will to acquiesce. For example, in October 2022, the Second Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation ruled (in a decision published in the Bull Civ.) that partial payment by a debtor does not constitute tacit acquiescence if the creditor had already initiated seizure proceedings. To find out more, see our comparative analysis of recent developments in case law on tacit acquiescence sets out in detail the criteria used by the courts to establish unequivocal intent (see for example RTD civ. 2023, p. 451, note by H. Croze).
Tax and financial implications of acquiescing to a judgment in a commercial dispute
Acquiescence is not just a procedural act; it has direct financial consequences. In commercial and financial law, acquiescing in a judgment of the Commercial Court crystallises a debt definitively. In the context of collective proceedings, this act can have major consequences for all creditors: the debtor's acquiescence could be analysed as a breach of equality between creditors, an aspect that the Commercial Code strictly regulates. This act must be immediately reflected in the company's accounts, which may affect its balance sheet and results. From a tax point of view, the acknowledgement of a debt or the acceptance of an indemnity may trigger reporting obligations or the payment of certain taxes, an aspect that is often underestimated.
In-depth study of specific areas where acquiescence is prohibited by law or case law or is strictly regulated
In addition to issues relating to personal status, acquiescence is regulated in other areas where public policy is paramount. For example, in insolvency proceedings, a debtor's freedom to acquiesce may be limited to protect the equality of creditors. Similarly, in certain employment law disputes covered by the Labour Code and affecting employees' fundamental freedoms, the possibility of acquiescence may be reviewed by the court judge to ensure that consent is genuine and not coerced.
Practical examples and pitfalls to avoid when drafting deeds of acquiescence
The wording of a deed of acquiescence must be precise to avoid any ambiguity. A partial acquiescence must clearly identify the parts of the judgment concerned. The main pitfall is unintentional implicit acquiescence, for example by paying an unenforceable judgment without making any clear reservations about the intention to appeal. It is therefore essential always to accompany a payment or an act of enforcement with an explicit written statement preserving the right to appeal. For example, in the course of new proceedings at first instance, a poorly worded partial acquiescence could be interpreted broadly by the pre-trial judge, prematurely closing the time limit for appealing on related heads of claim.
Controlling acquiescence is a strategic issue in the conduct of a trial. Its irreversible consequences require a rigorous analysis of the situation and a perfect knowledge of the rules of procedure. Our firm is at your disposal for an in-depth analysis of your situation and to help you make the right decisions.
Frequently asked questions
What is acquiescence in simple terms?
Acquiescence is the act by which a person involved in a lawsuit accepts either his opponent's claim or the judge's decision. It is a way of putting an end to the debate by giving up the right to contest.
Is an acquiescence final?
Yes, in principle, acquiescence is irrevocable. Once it has been given, there is no going back, except in very limited cases such as a defect in consent (error, violence) or if the other party itself subsequently lodges an appeal.
What is the main difference between acquiescing to the application and acquiescing to the judgment?
Acquiescing to the claim means acknowledging that your opponent is right on the merits of the case and abandoning the action. Acquiescing to the judgment means accepting the judge's decision and waiving the right to appeal or to exercise other remedies.
Is it possible to acquiesce in only part of a judgment?
Yes, it is perfectly possible to acquiesce in only certain aspects of a court decision, provided that they are independent of the other aspects that you wish to continue to challenge.
Does paying a sum due after a judgement automatically mean acquiescence?
No, not necessarily. If the judgment is enforceable (for example, if it is provisionally enforceable), payment is considered to be obligatory. If it is not, unconditional payment constitutes acquiescence. To avoid this, payment should always be accompanied by a letter stating that it is made "subject to appeal".
Why is it advisable to consult a lawyer before acquiescing?
Consulting a lawyer is essential because the consequences of acquiescence are definitive and can be very serious. A lawyer can assess the strategic relevance of this act, ensure that it is valid and draft the terms to best protect your interests.
EN 
FR