{"id":18390,"date":"2026-04-16T14:38:08","date_gmt":"2026-04-16T13:38:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/guides\/voies-d-execution\/execution-provisoire\/"},"modified":"2026-04-16T14:38:11","modified_gmt":"2026-04-16T13:38:11","slug":"provisional-execution","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/guides\/voies-d-execution\/execution-provisoire\/","title":{"rendered":"Provisional enforcement: operation, conditions and remedies"},"content":{"rendered":"

Your opponent has obtained a judgment. He can enforce it immediately - make you pay, seize your accounts, evict you - even if you lodge an appeal. Since 1 January 2020, this has been the rule.<\/p>\n

Before the reform, filing an appeal was enough to freeze enforcement of the judgment. Those days are gone. Visit decree no. 2019-1333 of 11 December 2019<\/a> has brought about a complete reversal: provisional enforcement is now de jure for all first instance decisions, barring a few exceptions. This guide explains what this means, what remedies are available and how to use them effectively.<\/p>\n

What is provisional execution?<\/h2>\n

Provisional enforcement is the right granted to the successful party - the creditor - to immediately enforce a first instance judgment, despite the exercise of an ordinary remedy (appeal or opposition). In practice, it neutralises the suspensive effect normally attached to an appeal: the creditor does not have to wait for the final decision to recover his debt.<\/p>\n

Article 514 of the Code of Civil Procedure sets out the framework: provisional execution allows a person to \u00abpursue, at his own risk, the immediate execution of the judicial decision to which it is attached, despite the suspensive effect attached to the time limit for appeal or its exercise\u00bb.<\/p>\n

The distinction with final execution<\/h3>\n

The two concepts must be carefully distinguished. Final enforcement occurs when the decision has become res judicata - the time limit for appeal has expired or the remedies have been exhausted (article 500 CPC). At this stage, the creditor can enforce without risk of restitution.<\/p>\n

Provisional enforcement, on the other hand, concerns a decision that may still be overturned on appeal. It applies to at the creditor's risk<\/strong> (article L. 111-10 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures). If the judgment is subsequently overturned, the creditor must return what it has obtained and compensate the debtor for the damage caused - without any fault being required.<\/p>\n

It is this dual nature - offensive tool for the creditor, major risk for the debtor - that structures the whole regime of provisional execution. The creditor bets on confirmation on appeal. If he loses, he pays.<\/p>\n

\n
Article 514 of the Code of Civil Procedure (decree no. 2019-1333 of 11 December 2019)<\/div>\n

\u00abFirst instance decisions shall be provisionally enforceable by operation of law unless otherwise provided by law or by the decision rendered.\u00bb<\/p><\/blockquote><\/div>\n

The 2019 reform: automatic provisional enforcement as a principle<\/h2>\n

Before 2019: a regulated exception<\/h3>\n

Under the old law, the principle was that an appeal had suspensive effect. An appeal automatically froze enforcement of the judgment. Provisional execution could only be ordered in two cases: either the law expressly provided for it for certain decisions (summary orders, protective measures), or the judge ordered it on an optional basis when he considered it \u00abnecessary\u00bb.<\/p>\n

This system had a consequence that was well known to practitioners: dilatory appeals. A convicted party could lodge an appeal with no real intention of having the merits of the case decided, simply to delay the execution of the judgment for the eighteen to twenty-four months of the appeal procedure. Professor Hoonakker described the suspensive effect of ordinary appeal procedures as \u00abchimerical\u00bb as early as 1988.<\/p>\n

Decree 2019-1333: a complete turnaround<\/h3>\n

Decree no. 2019-1333 of 11 December 2019 reversed the logic. From now on, according to article 514 of the Code of Civil Procedure, all first instance decisions are provisionally enforceable by operation of law<\/strong>, An appeal does not suspend enforcement - it starts it. The appeal no longer suspends enforcement - it allows it to run its course.<\/p>\n

This text only applies to proceedings instituted on or after 1 January 2020. The Court of Cassation has confirmed that a first president who applies article 514-3 CPC to proceedings brought before that date is exceeding his powers (Cass. 2e civ., 13 Jan. 2022, no. 20-17.344). For earlier proceedings, the former regime - more favourable to suspension - remains applicable.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Criteria<\/th>\nOld regime (instances < 2020)<\/th>\nNew scheme (instances \u2265 2020)<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Principle<\/td>\nSuspensive effect of appeal - execution frozen<\/td>\nEP of right - immediate execution<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Exception<\/td>\nEP as of right for certain limited decisions + optional EP ordered by the judge<\/td>\nJudge may set aside the EP if incompatible with the nature of the case (art. 514-1)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Termination of statutory PE<\/td>\nClear breach of the adversarial principle or art. 12 CPC + excessive consequences<\/td>\nSerious grounds for annulment\/revision + manifestly excessive consequences (art. 514-3)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Expertise<\/td>\nFirst President of the Court of Appeal<\/td>\nFirst chair (or CME on appointment)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n

When the judge can still set aside provisional enforcement<\/h3>\n

The court of first instance retains the power to set aside provisional enforcement, in whole or in part, if it considers that it is \u00abincompatible with the nature of the case\u00bb (article 514-1 CPC). The court will rule on its own initiative or at the request of a party, in a specially reasoned decision.<\/p>\n

However, this option is strictly limited. It is irreducible for certain decisions whose very nature justifies immediate enforcement: summary orders, decisions of the pre-trial judge granting an advance, provisional or protective measures. And the judge may never set aside the EP de droit on the sole ground that he doubts the merits of his own decision - the incompatibility must relate to the nature of the case, not to the risk of it being overturned.<\/p>\n

Optional provisional enforcement<\/h2>\n

Optional provisional enforcement remains in areas where the law expressly provides that the court may order it. The most common case is industrial tribunal litigation: article R. 1454-28 of the Labour Code provides that certain awards - wages, severance pay, damages for dismissal without real cause - are enforceable on a provisional basis up to a limit of nine months' salary calculated on the average of the last three months. Beyond that, the EP is optional.<\/p>\n

The conditions of article 515 CPC<\/h3>\n

Where it is optional, the EP may be ordered at the request of a party or ex officio, for all or part of the award, provided that it is not prohibited by law and that it is compatible with the nature of the case. Case law has clarified the concept of incompatibility: the EP of an eviction indemnity is incompatible when it disregards the right of a tenant with a commercial lease to remain on the premises (Cass. 3e civ., 5 Apr. 2006, no. 04-12.598).<\/p>\n

The contemporaneity rule<\/h3>\n

Article 516 CPC imposes a formal constraint: provisional execution may only be ordered by the decision that it is intended to enforce. Once the court has relinquished jurisdiction, it can no longer go back on its decision to add provisional enforcement. It is because this rule has been overlooked that some litigants apply for provisional enforcement late - in which case the application is inadmissible.<\/p>\n

The effects of provisional execution during an appeal<\/h2>\n

Conditions precedent to enforcement<\/h3>\n

The creditor cannot initiate compulsory execution as soon as the judgment is delivered. Three preconditions must be met. First, service of the judgment on the debtor<\/strong> (article 503 CPC): without prior notification by a court commissioner, forced execution is irregular (Cass. 2e civ., 14 Sept. 2006, no. 04-20.602). Secondly, the guarantee must be provided if the court has made the levy subject to its provision. Finally, possession of an enforceable copy of the judgment.<\/p>\n

\n
Pitfall - implied acquiescence (article 410 al. 2 CPC)<\/div>\n

A debtor who voluntarily executes a judgment without reservation - beyond what is covered by provisional execution - runs the risk of seeing it as an acquiescence amounting to a waiver of appeal on these counts. Payment made under the constraint of due execution does not constitute acquiescence. But spontaneous payment, even partial payment, can be tricky. If in doubt, express reservations should be made and notified to the other party.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

Procedures open to creditors<\/h3>\n

A creditor in possession of a provisional enforcement order has access to all civil enforcement procedures: attachment<\/a> on bank accounts, attachment of earnings<\/a>, The debtor may also be subject to seizure and sale of movable property and protective measures. He is also entitled to interest at the rate applicable to the claims of legal entities (article L. 313-3 of the French Monetary and Financial Code).<\/p>\n

The Court of Cassation has confirmed that this mechanism is compatible with the right to a fair trial guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Cass. 2e civ., 10 Feb. 2005, no. 03-15.067).<\/p>\n

Two important limits in property matters<\/h3>\n

Provisional enforcement is not all-purpose. Two major limitations temper the creditor's power. The first is that, forced sale of an immovable<\/strong> can only take place after a final decision has become res judicata (article L. 311-4 CPCE) - you have to wait for the final confirmation of the judgement. The next step is, cancellation of a mortgage registration<\/strong> also requires a final judgment (article 2440 of the Civil Code).<\/p>\n

The creditor can, however, take out a provisional judicial mortgage on the debtor's property as soon as the first instance judgment is handed down - which freezes the property without selling it. To go through with the sale, you have to wait. Those who forget to do this risk having the proceedings declared null and void and being ordered to pay damages.<\/p>\n

Performance at the creditor's risk<\/h3>\n

This is the fundamental counterpart of immediate enforcement. Article L. 111-10 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures is clear: enforcement by virtue of a provisional order can only give rise, in the event of reversal, to restitution and compensation for damages. no fault required<\/strong> (Cass. 2e civ., 17 Sept. 2020, no. 19-17.721).<\/p>\n

The rule applies even if a confirmatory judgment is subsequently quashed: a creditor who has enforced a first-instance judgment upheld on appeal and then quashed must also make restitution (Cass. 2e civ., 31 Jan. 2019, no. 17-28.605). Provisional enforcement therefore creates a real financial risk that the creditor must anticipate.<\/p>\n

How to stop provisional execution on appeal<\/h2>\n

This is the central question for the debtor appealing. The answer is clear: only the first president of the court of appeal<\/strong> has jurisdiction, ruling in summary proceedings. No other court may assume jurisdiction (Cass. 2e civ., 17 Feb 2011, no. 10-15.115). As soon as the Conseiller de la Mise en Condition is appointed, jurisdiction is transferred to him.<\/p>\n

The application is admissible only if an appeal has been lodged. It may relate to all of the judgments, even if the appellant challenges only part of them on appeal (Cass. 2e civ., 18 Feb. 2016, no. 14-20.199). The order is final at this stage - it cannot be appealed to the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

The two cumulative conditions of article 514-3 CPC<\/h3>\n

For proceedings commenced on or after 1 January 2020, the cessation of automatic provisional enforcement is subject to two conditions that must be met together:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The existence of a serious grounds for annulment or reversal<\/strong> of the decision - a plea which, if accepted, would lead the Court of Appeal to overturn the decision.<\/li>\n
  2. A risk of manifestly excessive consequences<\/strong> if enforcement is continued<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    One is not enough without the other. An excellent ground of appeal does not in itself justify stopping the EP if the financial consequences remain bearable for the debtor. And serious consequences for the debtor are not enough if the appeal is not based on any serious grounds.<\/p>\n

    The concept of \u00abmanifestly excessive consequences\u00bb<\/h3>\n

    This is the most demanding criterion. Case law has been consistent since the landmark ruling of 12 November 1997 (Cass. 2e civ., no. 95-20.280): manifestly excessive costs are assessed exclusively on the basis of the following criteria the debtor's situation<\/strong> - its ability to pay, and the other party's ability to reimburse in the event of a reversal. It is not assessed with regard to the legality or merits of the judgment.<\/p>\n

    In practical terms, it is not enough for performance to be painful or financially uncomfortable. It is necessary to demonstrate a flagrant imbalance - the risk of going out of business, the impossibility of repayment in the event of a reversal due to the creditor's lack of solvency, irreparable harm in its very nature. The burden of proof lies with the applicant for the judgment: balance sheets, bank statements, accounting certificates - bare allegations are never enough.<\/p>\n

    Layout: an alternative to a complete stop<\/h3>\n

    Where the conditions of the judgment are not met, there is an alternative. Article 521 CPC gives the First President the power to order the consignment<\/strong> of all or part of the sentence - the sums are deposited with a receiver or the Caisse des D\u00e9p\u00f4ts rather than paid directly to the creditor. If the judgment is overturned, the money will be returned to the debtor without delay.<\/p>\n

    This power of adjustment is discretionary and independent of the condition of manifestly excessive consequences: the first president may exercise it even if this condition is not met (Cass. 2e civ., 27 Feb 2014, no. 12-24.873). The deposit does not block the sums definitively - it secures them pending the final decision.<\/p>\n

    The consequences of overturning an enforced judgment<\/h2>\n

    If the Court of Appeal overturns the judgment that had been enforced, the situation is completely reversed.<\/p>\n

    The obligation to make restitution<\/h3>\n

    The creditor must restore the debtor's rights. Restitution is made in kind if possible, or by equivalent if restitution in kind has become impossible (Cass. 2e civ., 13 Apr. 2023, no. 21-11.716). In the case of pecuniary judgments, restitution includes the capital paid out and the interest from the date of payment<\/strong> - and not of the notification of the invalidity ruling (Cass. soc., 28 Oct. 1981, no. 79-42.537).<\/p>\n

    No-fault liability<\/h3>\n

    The rule is long-standing, constant and strict: provisional execution is carried out at the creditor's own risk. If the order is overturned, the creditor compensates the debtor for the damage caused - without the debtor having to prove any fault (article L. 111-10 CPCE; Cass. 2e civ., 17 Sept. 2020, no. 19-17.721). This objective liability is the necessary counterpart to the immediate effectiveness granted to the creditor.<\/p>\n

    The rule also applies to appeal judgments that have been enforced and then set aside. A creditor who has complied with a confirmatory judgment that is then quashed cannot avoid the obligation to make restitution on the grounds that the quashing is attributable to an error of law by the court of appeal - he has acted at his own risk (Cass. 2e civ., 31 Jan. 2019, no. 17-28.605).<\/p>\n

    In practice, this creates an obligation of vigilance for the creditor before initiating heavy enforcement measures: if the debtor's solvency is doubtful, it is necessary to ensure that its own solvency will enable it to repay in the event of reversal - or accept that the debtor's rights will never be restored.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Depuis le 1er janvier 2020, toutes les d\u00e9cisions de premi\u00e8re instance sont ex\u00e9cutoires de droit. Votre adversaire peut faire saisir vos comptes pendant que vous interjetez appel. Ce guide explique le m\u00e9canisme, les effets pratiques pendant l’appel, et les conditions strictes pour l’arr\u00eater.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"parent":18291,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"page-templates\/template-guide-enfant.php","meta":{"footnotes":""},"solent_domaine":[447,414],"class_list":["post-18390","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18390","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=18390"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18390\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18391,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18390\/revisions\/18391"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18291"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18390"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"solent_domaine","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/solent_domaine?post=18390"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}