The European Small Claims Procedure (ESCP) is a simplified written procedure created by Regulation (EC) 861/2007 for civil and commercial cross-border claims of up to €5,000, excluding interest, expenses and disbursements; in France, a creditor brings the claim before the tribunal judiciaire or the tribunal de commerce (commercial court). Unlike the European Order for Payment of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006, the ESCP is adversarial: the debtor answers the claim form. The resulting judgment then circulates across the Member States bound by the Regulation, without exequatur.
The ESCP is one of several routes to recover a debt in France. This guide answers the three questions that decide the outcome in France: which court, what it costs, and what a counterclaim changes.
What the European Small Claims Procedure is, and which French court hears it
Regulation (EC) 861/2007 created a simplified procedure for cross-border civil and commercial claims not exceeding €5,000. In France, two courts apply it: the tribunal judiciaire in civil matters and the tribunal de commerce in commercial matters. The claimant files a standard form, and the court rules in writing on the documents.
Which French court: tribunal judiciaire or tribunal de commerce
Two French courts may hear an ESCP claim, depending on the nature of the dispute. Regulation 861/2007 is neutral on that point: European Union law designates the Member State, while national law designates the competent court inside it.
In civil matters, the tribunal judiciaire has jurisdiction. Article L. 211-4-2 of the Code of Judicial Organisation, in force since 1 January 2020, covers « claims brought under Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 ».
In commercial matters, the commercial courts hear the same claims within the limits of their own subject-matter jurisdiction (« dans les limites de leur compétence d’attribution »). Article L. 721-3-1 of the French Commercial Code, in force since 1 March 2016, sets that limit. The reservation points back to article L. 721-3: disputes between traders, disputes concerning commercial companies, and disputes over commercial acts. Under French law, the qualification of the dispute therefore comes first, and Regulation 861/2007 supplies only the procedural vehicle.
| Nature of the dispute | Court seised in France | Text |
|---|---|---|
| Civil matter | tribunal judiciaire | Code of Judicial Organisation, art. L. 211-4-2 (since 1 January 2020) |
| Commercial matter: traders, commercial companies, commercial acts | tribunal de commerce | French Commercial Code, art. L. 721-3-1 (since 1 March 2016) |
A cross-border recovery between two businesses is a commercial dispute, so a creditor brings the claim before the commercial court, not before the tribunal judiciaire. The tribunal judiciaire of Saint-Étienne applied that rule on 11 February 2025 (RG 25/00071): seised of a €2,450 claim between a French company and a Luxembourg company, it declined jurisdiction in favour of the tribunal de commerce.
Where to file: the defendant’s domicile
Territorial jurisdiction answers a different question: which town, not which type of court. Under article 1382 of the French Code of Civil Procedure, the claim goes to the court of the debtor’s domicile.
Subject-matter jurisdiction and territorial jurisdiction must not be merged: the first names the type of court, the second names the place. A third question remains: which Member State’s courts may hear the claim at all. On that point, the Brussels I bis Regulation decides, not French law.
Decrees no. 2008-1346 and no. 2010-433 created articles 1382 to 1391 of that code. Bringing legal action before the wrong court costs time: the court seised declines jurisdiction and transfers the file.
Eligibility: cross-border element and the €5,000 ceiling
Two conditions govern admissibility. The value of the claim must not exceed €5,000, and at least one party must be domiciled in another Member State. Both are assessed on the day the claim form reaches the court seised. A purely domestic dispute is excluded whatever its value, and Article 2 removes ten categories of matter.
Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 sets the financial limit at €5,000 (in France, measured at the date of receipt at the registry). A principal debt of €4,800 carrying €400 of interest therefore stays under the ceiling. Regulation (EU) 2015/2421 raised the limit from €2,000 on 14 July 2017.
Article 3 sets the second condition: a case is cross-border where at least one party is domiciled or habitually resident in a Member State other than the one where the court seised sits. Domicile follows Articles 62 and 63 of the Brussels I bis Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012. In ZSE Energia (22 November 2018, C-627/17), the Court of Justice held that only the claimant and the defendant count as parties: an intervening party domiciled in another EU country does not make an internal case cross-border.
Matters excluded by Article 2
Article 2(2) removes ten categories whatever their value: status and capacity of natural persons, matrimonial property, maintenance, wills and succession, bankruptcy, social security, arbitration, employment law, tenancies except monetary claims, and violations of privacy. What remains is wide: civil and commercial matters, including consumer cases (an unpaid invoice between traders, or a consumer claim against a trader).
Countries outside the procedure: Denmark and the United Kingdom
Two European countries sit outside the procedure. Denmark has been excluded since 2007, through its opt-out from judicial cooperation in civil matters. The United Kingdom left the scope on 1 January 2021: Regulation 861/2007 is recorded as revoked on the British legislative register, and only claims lodged before the end of the Brexit transition period survive. The tribunal judiciaire of Paris applied that exclusion on 10 July 2025 to a claimant domiciled there.
A judgment obtained in the United Kingdom no longer travels under the Regulation: the creditor must go through exequatur in France.
Filing Form A: the written procedure step by step
The claimant starts the procedure by filing Form A with the competent French court. The court serves the claim on the defendant, who has 30 days to answer using Form C. The procedure is written: a hearing takes place only if a party requests one and the court accepts. No lawyer is required.
A creditor who decides to make a claim follows six steps.
- The claimant completes standard claim Form A (Annex I to Regulation 861/2007), describes the supporting evidence and attaches the relevant documents (Article 4).
- In France, the claimant files that application form at the greffe (court registry) of the competent court, or sends it by post (French Code of Civil Procedure, article 1383).
- Where the claims form is incomplete, the court asks the claimant to complete it on standard Form B. The court dismisses a clearly unfounded claim, without appeal in France (article 1385).
- The court fills in Part I of the answer form (Article 5(2)), then serves Form C with the claim form on the defendant within 14 days (Article 13). The defendant responds within 30 days, in Part II of that response form.
- If the case falls outside the scope, the court warns the claimant by registered letter and sets a period to withdraw. Failing withdrawal, it refers the file to its ordinary procedure (article 1384).
- The court must give judgment within 30 days of receiving the response (Article 7), after any further details, evidence or oral hearing it orders. Total duration often exceeds 30 days.
Service, evidence and hearings
Service under Article 13 is by post, with a dated acknowledgment of receipt, or electronic where the recipient accepted it in advance. French law adds a safeguard: if the registered letter fails, a commissaire de justice (French judicial officer) serves the document at the registry’s request, the Trésor public advancing the cost (article 1387). That safety net stops at the judgment, notified by registered letter only (article 1389).
The written procedure remains the principle. The court holds an oral hearing only if the written evidence does not allow it to rule, or if a party requests one; hearings run by videoconference by default (Article 8), under the ordinary French rules (article 1388). Evidence is taken by the simplest method (Article 9). Representation by a lawyer is not mandatory (Article 10): French law makes it compulsory only above €10,000 (article 761). The judge will not rely on new evidence from one party without first sending it to the other (Cass. 1re civ., 10 April 2019, no. 17-13.307).
Counterclaims: how the defendant can push the case out of the procedure
A defendant may answer with a counterclaim, and that counter claim is submitted on the same standard Form A as the original claim. Article 5(6) and (7) then sets the timetable and, above €5,000, the exit from the procedure altogether.
The court serves the counterclaim and its supporting documents on the claimant within 14 days of receipt. The claimant then has 30 days from service to respond. The cut-off sits in paragraph 7: where the counterclaim exceeds €5,000, the whole file leaves the European Small Claims Procedure.
« the claim and counterclaim shall not proceed in the European Small Claims Procedure but shall be dealt with in accordance with the relevant procedural law applicable in the Member State in which the procedure is conducted » (Article 5(7)).
No severance is possible: the main claim cannot stay inside while the counterclaim goes out. In France, article 1386 of the French Code of Civil Procedure organises that exit. The court informs both parties by registered letter and gives the counterclaiming party a period to withdraw. Failing withdrawal, the court records that the dispute leaves the procedure and refers the case to a hearing under its ordinary rules. The court may then decline jurisdiction.
The consequence for a creditor is strategic: starting a European small claims action does not immunise the file against a larger counter-claim. A set-off or a damages claim above €5,000 costs the creditor the benefit of the simplified route, and that loss covers the whole dispute, including the part of the debt that always stayed under the ceiling. A creditor should weigh that risk before choosing this route, particularly where the debtor holds potential counter-claims.
Time limits, language and what the procedure costs in France
The defendant answers within 30 days, and the claimant has 14 days to comment on that answer. The court gives judgment within 30 days of the last submission. Forms may be completed in any official EU language. Court fees in France depend on which court hears the claim.
Time limits and language
Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 of 11 July 2007 sets a timetable that French courts apply directly. Each step listed above opens its own 30-day limit, so the real deadline can exceed a month.
The standard forms exist in every official language of the European Union. Article 21a lets each Member State declare which languages it accepts for the certificate: a creditor suing in France completes Form A in French. Translation matters most at enforcement. Article 21(2)(b) requires standard Form D translated into the official language of the Member State of enforcement. The translator must be qualified in a Member State (Article 21a(2)). The court issues Form D at no extra cost.
Court fees in France: two separate regimes
France has no single court fee for the European Small Claims Procedure. The tribunal de commerce charges a registry fee; before the tribunal judiciaire, a separate tax-based contribution is in issue.
European law sets the frame rather than the amount. Article 15a, inserted by Regulation (EU) 2015/2421 from 14 July 2017, caps court fees: neither disproportionate, nor higher than those charged for national simplified procedures. Under Article 16, the unsuccessful party bears the costs, minus those unnecessarily incurred. In Jonsson (14 February 2019, C-554/17), the Court of Justice allowed national law to split them where a party succeeds only in part.
| Court seised | Charge | Basis | Amount (July 2026) | Reservation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| tribunal de commerce | émolument de greffe (registry fee, judgment, two parties) | C. com., art. A. 743-9, I, item 18, in force 1 March 2026 | €25.17 (+ €5.05 per extra party) | Ordinary tariff; no text names Regulation 861/2007. Confirm with the registry |
| tribunal judiciaire | contribution pour l’aide juridique (legal aid contribution) | CGI, art. 1635 bis Q, I, in force 1 July 2026; CPC, art. 62 | €50 | Application to Form A unsettled: check before filing |
Before the tribunal de commerce, that tariff is the ordinary one for a judgment on the merits. No text identified names Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 or Form A in connection with it. Applying it to a Form A claim rests on the identity of procedural category, not on an express provision. The €50 contribution does not arise before that court, since Article 1635 bis Q, I names only a tribunal judiciaire or a conseil de prud’hommes.
Before the tribunal judiciaire, no registry fee of that kind is charged. A legal aid contribution of €50 has been levied on civil proceedings since 1 July 2026. Non-payment carries inadmissibility under Article 62 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Whether filing Form A triggers that contribution is not settled: no text addresses the European procedure, and no exemption covers it. The contribution would appear to be due on a literal reading, and a creditor should check the point with the registry seised.
Under French law, the two charges belong to different regimes. The émolument remunerates a ministerial officer; the contribution is a tax for the legal aid budget. Because each attaches to a different court, they never apply to the same claim, and no single figure describes what the procedure costs in France. The Cour de cassation held on 10 April 2019 that expenses caused by the proceedings are recoverable only under Article 700 of that code. Amounts stated here are in force as at July 2026; tariffs are revised by order.
Enforcing the judgment in France and across the European Union
A judgment given under the procedure is recognised in every other Member State without any declaration of enforceability. Articles 20 and 21 abolish exequatur. The creditor obtains Form D (the certificate of enforcement) from the court of origin. In France, the creditor then instructs a commissaire de justice to enforce the judgment.
Form D and enforcement without exequatur
Article 20 abolishes any intermediate procedure between the judgment and its enforcement abroad. The court that ruled issues the certificate on standard Form D, at no extra cost, at a party’s request. Recognition means the Member State of enforcement accepts the ruling as final; enforceability means the judgment creditor may seize assets there.
« A judgment given in a Member State in the European Small Claims Procedure shall be recognised and enforced in another Member State without the need for a declaration of enforceability […]. » (Article 20(1))
In France, Article 1390 of the Code de procédure civile puts the certificate in the hands of the court registry, the greffe. The registry issues it on request, and no separate French authority intervenes.
Enforcement itself stays national. Under Article 21, the law of the Member State of enforcement governs the procedures, and the creditor produces the judgment with its certificate. The decision then becomes an enforceable title in France, recoverable without a fresh trial. Available measures include attachment of earnings, seizure of movable assets, and an order to seize the debtor’s bank account. Contested measures go before the enforcement judge. Article 21 bars any security deposit imposed on a foreign creditor. Under Article 23a, a court settlement approved during the procedure enjoys the same regime.
Appeal (Article 17) and review (Article 18)
Regulation (EC) 861/2007 creates no European right of appeal. Article 17 requires each Member State to tell the Commission whether an appeal lies against an ESCP judgment, and within what time limit. Appeal therefore follows the law of the Member State where the judgment was given (French procedural law here, not the Regulation). Article 17(2) adds one guarantee: the caps of Articles 15a and 16 also apply on appeal.
Article 18 opens a separate and exceptional remedy: review. Only a defendant who did not enter an appearance may apply, on two grounds: defective service of the claim form, or force majeure without fault on his part. The time limit is 30 days and cannot be extended; it runs from the day the judgment debtor learned the contents of the judgment, or from the first enforcement measure at the latest.
In France, Article 1391 routes that right through the opposition procedure, or « des modalités procédurales similaires » where opposition is not open. For the creditor, this is the main residual risk in cross-border debt recovery: enforcement may begin, and a review application may still follow.