Article 750-1 of the French Code of Civil Procedure is a fundamental provision governing civil legal proceedings in France. This rule, often ignored by litigants, plays a crucial role in the smooth running of legal proceedings. For legal professionals, mastering this provision is an essential part of their regulatory framework and continuing legal education.

What is article 750-1 CPC?

Article 750-1 of the French Code of Civil Procedure sets out the rules governing compulsory representation by a lawyer before certain courts. The text states: “Unless otherwise provided, the parties shall defend themselves. They may be assisted or represented by a lawyer. This fundamental provision specifies the conditions under which parties must be represented by a lawyer in order to be able to take legal action.

The text stipulates that legal representation is mandatory before the judicial court (formerly the tribunal de grande instance since the January 1, 2020 reform), except in cases expressly provided for by law. This obligation, which came into force with the 2020 judicial reform, is designed to guarantee the quality of proceedings and equality of arms between the parties.

The article also applies to appeal proceedings, reinforcing the importance of professional representation in second-degree proceedings. This requirement is in line with the ongoing modernization of the French judicial system.

Scope and procedures concerned

Article 750-1 CPC applies primarily to proceedings before the judicial courts, created by the merger of the tribunaux de grande instance and tribunaux d’instance since the 2020 reform. The civil proceedings concerned include property disputes over 10,000 euros, civil liability actions and first-instance contractual disputes.

There are, however, certain exceptions to compulsory representation. Summary proceedings, requests for advance payment, proceedings on petition, and proceedings before the family court in certain specific matters may be exempted from this requirement. Industrial tribunal proceedings and social security disputes also retain their own special rules on representation.

Since the judicial reorganization of 2020, the Judicial Court handles all civil cases, with mandatory representation by a lawyer for disputes exceeding the thresholds set by law. For smaller cases, parties may still defend themselves before certain specialized panels of the judicial court.

Obligations of parties and lawyers

Article 750-1 CPC imposes strict obligations on both parties and lawyers. Parties are required to set up a lawyer within 15 days of the summons in contentious cases, or within 4 months in non-contentious cases, failing which their action will be declared inadmissible. This time limit may be reduced to 8 days in the event of emergency or summary proceedings.

Lawyers, for their part, must comply with ethical and procedural rules. They must represent their clients effectively and respect procedural deadlines. Today, online lawyer training enables professionals to keep their skills up to date and master procedural developments.

The constitution of a lawyer must be formalized by a written document, generally a power of attorney or a special power of attorney, enabling the lawyer to act in the name and on behalf of his client. In the event of failure to set up a lawyer within the time limit, the matter may be rectified with the judge’s authorization, but only if the request is submitted before the close of the proceedings and is accompanied by legitimate reasons justifying the delay.

Penalties for non-compliance

Failure to comply with article 750-1 CPC entails significant procedural sanctions. Inadmissibility is the main sanction, preventing the unrepresented party from asserting its rights before the court.

This inadmissibility may be raised ex officio by the judge or invoked by the opposing party. It can occur at any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal, if the conditions for representation are not met.

Deadlines for regularizing the situation are generally short and strict. Once the deadline has passed, regularization becomes impossible and the action is definitively inadmissible.

Impact on modern legal practice

The application of article 750-1 CPC is evolving with the modernization of the French legal system. The dematerialization of procedures is changing the way in which lawyers are constituted and representation is required, notably with the development of online legal advice and the emergence of the digital court.

This provision has a direct impact onaccess to justice, creating a financial barrier for litigants who are obliged to retain a lawyer. Judicial statistics reveal an increase in the number of inadmissible cases due to lack of representation, particularly in complex civil litigation.

Recent developments in case law tend towards a strict interpretation of article 750-1 CPC, with the Cour de cassation regularly reaffirming the public policy nature of this obligation. Judges rigorously apply the sanctions of inadmissibility, even in dematerialized proceedings where issues of personal data protection, particularly in the context of the RGPD avocat, make the exercise of representation more complex.

Article 750-1 of the French Code of Civil Procedure remains a cornerstone of the French legal system. Its application in the modern digital environment raises new procedural challenges, while maintaining its fundamental objective: to guarantee the quality of representation and equality of arms in civil proceedings.

Text and basis of article 750-1 CPC

Article 750-1 of the French Code of Civil Procedure reads as follows:
“On pain of inadmissibility, which the judge may declare ex officio, the legal claim must be preceded, at the choice of the parties, by an attempt at conciliation led by a court conciliator, an attempt at mediation or an attempt at participatory procedure, when it concerns the payment of a sum not exceeding a certain amount or relates to a neighbor dispute.”

This provision has evolved significantly since its introduction by Decree no. 2019-1333 of December 11, 2019, which came into force on January 1, 2020. It follows on from Law no. 2016-1547 of November 18, 2016 on the modernization of justice in the 21st century, which had already strengthened alternative dispute resolution methods.

The legislator is pursuing several fundamental objectives with this provision:

• Reduce the backlog in the courts by encouraging out-of-court settlements of small disputes
• Guarantee the quality of judicial debates by reserving the judge’s intervention for situations where the parties have been unable to reach an agreement
• Ensureequality of arms between litigants by placing them within a framework of dialogue prior to any litigation.
• Promote a more peaceful and participatory justice system, in which the parties actively contribute to the resolution of their dispute.

This provision is part of an underlying trend aimed at transforming France’s traditionally litigious judicial culture towards a more collaborative, less adversarial model, while preserving access to the courts as the ultimate guarantee of the rights of litigants.