Behind the media trials involving the French state hides a little-known but fundamental institution: the Judicial Agent of the State (AJE). This body has been defending the Republic's financial interests for over two centuries. It plays a decisive role in balancing public finances and representing the State before the courts.
Birth and development of an institution
The AJE has its roots in the revolutionary period. A decree of 21 July-15 August 1790 created this function with the original wording : "one or two agents will be appointed by the King...".. A few weeks later, the decree of 27 and 31 August 1791 precisely defined its mission: to monitor "applications and petitions brought before the courts against the Nation".
This institution has survived political regimes while retaining its fundamental mission. However, its name has changed over time. For a long time known as the "Judicial Agent of the Treasury" (AJT), the institution was renamed the "Judicial Agent of the State" by Decree no. 2012-985 of 23 August 2012. This change was not cosmetic, but a response to three needs:
- Correcting a frequent confusion with the Treasury's services
- Recognise its interdepartmental nature
- Act on the evolution of its missions, which no longer concern debt collection
This change required the intervention of the Constitutional Council, which, in a decision dated 7 June 2012, downgraded the texts relating to AJT, recognising them as regulatory in nature.
AJE's core missions
Representation of the State before the judicial courts
Find out more about the legal mandate of the Judicial State Agent. The AJE's main role is to represent the State before the courts. Article 38 of Law no. 55-366 of 3 April 1955 stipulates that "any action brought before the courts of law seeking to have the State declared a creditor or debtor for reasons unrelated to taxation and property must, unless an exception is provided for by law, be brought on pain of nullity by or against the State's legal agent"..
This jurisdiction creates a "monopoly of representation" that has been consistently confirmed by case law. An emblematic "Fomberteau" ruling (Civ. 2e, 25 October 1995) established that "the State could not legally be represented by any official other than the judicial agent of the Treasury in proceedings to have it declared a debtor for reasons unrelated to taxes and property"..
Changes in debt collection assignments
Initially, the AJE was responsible for collecting government debts. However, this role was abolished in 1992 by decree no. 92-1369 of 29 December 1992. Since then, this function has been carried out by the Treasury's accountants, in particular by the Treasury's Special Receivables Department (DCST) in Châtellerault.
The legal expertise function
To understand how the State acts as a subject of law and is defended by the AJESince 1844, the AJE has also provided legal expertise to government departments. The decree of 18 December 1869 defined the scope of this advisory role. This role has developed considerably over time, culminating in Decree no. 98-975 of 2 November 1998 creating a Legal Affairs Department within the Ministry of the Economy.
Current organisation and structure of AJE
The AJE no longer exists as an autonomous agency. It has been integrated into the Legal Affairs Directorate (DAJ) of the Economic and Financial Ministries. Under article 1 of the decree of 2 November 1998, the Director of Legal Affairs is the State's legal agent.
To carry out this mission, eight deputy judicial officers assist him (since an order dated 6 December 2018):
- The Head of the Legal Affairs Department
- The Deputy Director of Public Procurement Law
- The Deputy Director of Private and Criminal Law
- The Deputy Director of Public, European and International Law
- The Deputy Director of Economic Regulation Law
- The three Heads of Office of the Sub-Directorate for Private and Criminal Law
In practice, it is usually the deputy director of private and criminal law who performs these functions. The AJE is supported by a team of around 50 staff who manage more than 11,000 active litigation cases. In addition, a network of 112 law firms assists the AJE before the courts.
When should I contact the AJE?
The AJE must be involved in all court cases in which the State may be declared a creditor or debtor, excluding tax and public property matters.
Concrete situations require its intervention:
- Litigation concerning traffic accidents involving State vehicles
- Subrogated claims when a civil servant is the victim of an accident
- Litigation linked to malfunctions in the public justice system
- Cases of unjustified pre-trial detention
- Litigation concerning hospitalisation without consent
It is important to make a clear distinction between the responsibility of the State and that of judges and magistrates. If a litigant wishes to bring an action against the State, the procedure requires the AJE to be summoned directly, failing which the action will be null and void. There are no exceptions to this rule, which is a matter of public policy.
Legal practitioners must pay particular attention to this obligation. A misdirected summons would be irremediably null and void. In addition, notification of a decision addressed to a department other than the AJE does not start the time limits for appeal.
Do you need to take legal action against the State or defend yourself after an action initiated by the AJE? Our lawyers specialising in administrative litigation can help you with these often complex procedures. Contact our firm for an in-depth analysis of your situation.
Sources
- Act No. 55-366 of 3 April 1955 on the development of credits allocated to expenditure by the Ministry of Finance
- Decree no. 2012-985 of 23 August 2012 substituting the name "judicial agent of the State" for the name "judicial agent of the Treasury".
- Decree no. 98-975 of 2 November 1998 creating a Legal Affairs Department at the Ministry of the Economy
- Order of 6 December 2018 on the State's deputy judicial agents
- Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Division, 25 October 1995, "Fomberteau".
- Constitutional Council decision no. 2012-231 L of 7 June 2012
EN 
FR