When a debt becomes payable, the prospect of foreclosure can quickly become a source of anxiety. For a private individual or the manager of a very small business, this is a delicate time when financial equilibrium is threatened. French law, aware of this vulnerability, has introduced a protective mechanism that allows debtors acting in good faith to request a judicial break in order to organise their affairs: the grace period. This measure, far from wiping out the debt, is part of the global framework for civil enforcement procedures as a means of overcoming a temporary difficulty. However, obtaining these time limits is not automatic and requires solid arguments, often with the support of a expert lawyer in enforcement law to maximise the chances of success.
Qu’est-ce qu’un délai de grâce judiciaire ?
Definition and legal basis: article 1343-5 of the Civil Code
The grace period is a payment facility granted by a judge to a debtor who cannot pay his debt immediately. It is primarily based on article 1343-5 of the Civil Code, which states that "the court may, taking into account the situation of the debtor and the needs of the creditor, postpone or stagger payment of the sums due, up to a maximum of two years".. Il ne s’agit en aucun cas d’annuler la dette, mais d’offrir un répit temporaire pour permettre au débiteur de se réorganiser financièrement. Cette mesure est une prérogative du juge ; un créancier n’est jamais obligé d’accepter un paiement partiel ou différé sans une décision de justice.
Possible adjustments granted by the judge
Le pouvoir du juge en la matière est relativement large. Il peut moduler les modalités de remboursement de la dette pour les adapter à la situation concrète du débiteur. Les aménagements prévus par la loi incluent principalement :
- Outright deferral of the payment due date, up to a maximum of two years.
- Debt repayment by instalments, i.e. dividing the debt into several instalments over a maximum period of two years.
- The decision that payments will be applied first to the principal of the debt, rather than the interest, means that the principal amount owed can be reduced more quickly.
- The order states that the sums deferred or paid in instalments will bear interest at a reduced rate, which may be lower than the legal rate, by special reasoned decision.
The court may also make the granting of these periods conditional on the debtor taking specific action to guarantee future payment of his debt, such as setting up a security.
The conditions for granting the grace period: a balance of interests
The debtor's situation: good faith and temporary difficulties
Pour bénéficier d’un délai de grâce, le débiteur doit avant tout être de bonne foi. Cela signifie qu’il ne doit pas avoir organisé volontairement son insolvabilité ou fait preuve de manœuvres dilatoires. La condition essentielle reste la nature de ses difficultés financières : elles doivent être temporaires et conjoncturelles (perte d’emploi, maladie, accident de la vie, baisse brutale d’activité) et non pas structurelles ou irrémédiables. Le juge cherche à déterminer si le répit accordé permettra réellement au débiteur de surmonter un obstacle passager et de reprendre ensuite le cours normal de ses paiements. Une demande de délai de paiement n’a de sens que si le créancier a déjà initié ou est sur le point d’initier une mesure d’exécution, souvent après une mise en demeure, laquelle doit obligatoirement être based on an enforceable title a valid document evidencing a debt that is certain, of a fixed amount and due.
Taking account of the creditor's needs
The judge does not simply examine the debtor's situation. He must balance the interests involved, as specified in article 1343-5 of the Civil Code. He takes into account the "needs of the creditor". In practical terms, if the creditor is a small business, a craftsman or an individual whose financial situation depends on the rapid collection of the sums owed, the judge will be less inclined to grant long delays that could put the creditor at risk. The decision is therefore based on a delicate balance between protecting the debtor and preserving the creditor's rights.
Reasons for refusal and debts excluded from the scheme
Rejection by the judge: a discretionary power
The judge has discretionary power to refuse to grant a period of grace and, unlike a decision to grant a period of grace, which must be justified, a refusal does not, in theory, have to be justified. A refusal may be based on the debtor's lack of good faith, for example if he has concealed part of his income or wilfully worsened his situation. Similarly, if the difficulties presented do not appear to be temporary but structural, the judge will consider that the grace period is not the appropriate solution and that another procedure is more appropriate. The absence of a credible repayment plan or the fact that a debtor has already been granted a grace period without complying with it are also frequent reasons for an unfavourable decision.
Legal exclusions: non-negotiable debts
By law, certain categories of debt are not eligible for a grace period because of their nature, which is often a matter of public policy. The most important of these are maintenance debts (alimony, contributions towards the upkeep and education of children, compensatory benefits). Their vital nature for the creditor justifies the judge not imposing any deferment or rescheduling. Other debts are also excluded by specific legislation. This is particularly the case for employee debts, which cannot be deferred under the Labour Code, or social security contributions. In addition, under article 512 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the grace period does not apply if the debtor has reduced the guarantees that he had given to his creditor by contract, or if his assets have already been seized by other creditors. It is important to note that the opening of collective proceedings (safeguard, reorganisation or liquidation) paralyses individual lawsuits, rendering a traditional request for a period of grace ineffective in favour of the specific rules for companies in difficulty.
The special case of over-indebtedness: the essential distinction
It is crucial not to confuse a request for a period of grace with the personal over-indebtedness procedure. The grace period is intended for solvent debtors who are faced with a temporary liquidity problem. The over-indebtedness procedure, on the other hand, is designed for individuals whose overall indebtedness is such that they are "clearly unable to meet all their non-business debts". This situation, described as irremediably compromised, is long-lasting and structural. It is managed by the over-indebtedness commission and can lead to far more serious measures, such as a recovery plan spanning several years, or even partial or total cancellation of debts. The judge will refuse a period of grace if he or she considers that the situation does in fact constitute over-indebtedness.
Comment obtenir un délai de paiement ? La procédure
Quel juge saisir : juge du fond, juge des référés ou JEX ?
The power to grant a period of grace varies according to the stage of the proceedings. Before any enforcement measures are taken, the court hearing the main dispute (e.g. the magistrates' court or the commercial court) may grant a period of grace in its judgment. In urgent cases, the interim relief judge may also intervene. However, once an enforcement measure has been initiated (by the service of a summons to pay or a writ of seizure by a judicial officer), jurisdiction in principle becomes exclusive. The application for extension of payment must then be submitted to the Enforcement Judge (JEX)In some cases, the protection judge may be the competent judge. In certain disputes, it should be noted that the protection litigation judge may be the competent judge. It is important to note that the JEX cannot call into question the enforceable title in principle, but it can arrange for it to be enforced.
The timing and effect of the request
Le débiteur peut formuler sa demande à différents moments. Idéalement, il la présente lors de l’instance initiale pour que le jugement de condamnation soit directement assorti de délais. S’il n’a pas anticipé, il doit agir rapidement une fois le titre exécutoire obtenu par le créancier, de préférence dès la réception d’un commandement de payer. Il est essentiel de comprendre que la simple saisine du juge n’a pas d’effet suspensif : elle n’arrête pas la procédure de saisie en cours. De plus, une fois qu’une saisie-attribution est signifiée à la banque, son effet attributif immédiat rend en principe impossible l’octroi de délais sur les sommes déjà saisies. Il faut donc agir vite.
Arguments and documents to be provided
Pour saisir le juge avec succès, le demandeur doit exposer sa situation financière de manière transparente et convaincante, en prouvant à la fois sa bonne foi et le caractère temporaire de ses difficultés. Pour ce faire, il doit produire un dossier complet comprenant des pièces justificatives précises :
- Proof of income (pay slips, benefits, etc.) and fixed expenses (rent, loans, energy bills).
- Proof of the event that caused the difficulties (letter of redundancy, medical certificate, etc.).
- Evidence of good faith, such as a history of regular payments prior to the incident, or attempts at amicable negotiation with the creditor.
- A realistic, costed repayment plan.
A well-documented and argued application significantly increases the chances of obtaining a favourable decision.
Quels sont les effets de la décision du juge ?
If granted: suspension of proceedings and enforcement
Lorsque le juge accorde des délais, la conséquence principale est la suspension des procédures d’exécution forcée engagées par le créancier. Toute saisie-vente ou saisie-attribution est interrompue pour la durée fixée. De plus, durant cette période, les pénalités et majorations de retard cessent de courir. Il est important de noter que cette suspension ne concerne que les mesures d’exécution forcée ; le créancier conserve le droit de prendre des mesures conservatoires (comme une hypothèque provisoire) pour garantir sa créance.
En cas de rejet : quelles conséquences et quels recours ?
If the court rejects the application for a time limit, the decision becomes enforceable immediately. The creditor then has the right to pursue or initiate seizure measures (attachment for payment, seizure of property, etc.). The debtor has the right to appeal, but the scope of this right is limited. An appeal is possible, but it has no suspensive effect, which means that the decision handed down at first instance remains enforceable. To halt enforcement pending appeal, the debtor must obtain a stay of execution from the first president of the court of appeal, which is granted only if there are serious grounds for reversing the judgment. It is crucial to note, and the Cour de cassation constantly reiterates this, that legal action in the form of an appeal, if its sole purpose is to obtain the granting of time limits without contesting the substance of the debt, is inadmissible. In such cases, the decision to refuse acquires the force of res judicata. If the judge decides to refuse to grant payment deadlines, the creditor may pursue compulsory execution. However, if enforcement is carried out disproportionately, the debtor can always challenge the validity of the decision. abusive nature of the seizure.
Specific cases of rental debts and consumer credit
Grace period and rental eviction: regulated protection
Specific rules apply to rent debts under a residential lease. If eviction proceedings are initiated, the judge may grant payment deadlines on the basis of article L. 412-3 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures. These deadlines can be much longer than the two years under ordinary law, ranging from three months to three years. The judge's decision is based on specific criteria such as the occupant's age, state of health, family situation and ability to be rehoused. These deadlines are often coordinated with the winter truce, which suspends evictions from 1 November to 31 March, but does not interrupt the obligation to pay rent.
Consumer credit: derogation from accelerated repayment
Une protection notable existe en matière de crédit à la consommation. Habituellement, le non-paiement d’une échéance entraîne la « déchéance du terme » : le contrat est résolu et la totalité du capital restant dû devient immédiatement exigible. Face à une telle clause, le juge de droit commun est souvent démuni. Cependant, l’article L. 314-20 du Code de la consommation autorise expressément le juge à suspendre les obligations de l’emprunteur, même après la déchéance du terme. Il peut ainsi accorder un délai de grâce pour permettre au consommateur, emprunteur défaillant, de reprendre le paiement de ses échéances selon un plan réaménagé, paralysant temporairement l’effet de la clause résolutoire.
Applying for a period of grace is a valuable tool for debtors faced with unforeseen difficulties, but the outcome depends on a rigorous analysis of the situation and precise arguments. To make sure you have every chance on your side and to help you put your case together, you can call on the assistance of a expert lawyer in enforcement law is strongly recommended.
Sources
- Civil Code: article 1343-5
- Code of civil procedure: articles 510 to 513
- Code of civil enforcement procedures: articles L. 412-3 to L. 412-4
- Consumer Code: article L. 314-20
EN 
FR