Yes, there is a class action mechanism in France. It was, at first, introduced into French law in 2014, for consumer law matters only (Law no. 2014-344, referred to as the “Hamon Law”). It was then extended to health and cosmetics, discrimination (in particular in the workplace), the environment and the protection of personal data in 2016. Since 2018, class actions can also be brought in the field of real property lease (through consumer law class actions).

Class actions can also be brought in administrative matters (i.e. actions against the French State).

Class actions in France are therefore limited to some areas.

French class actions enable a group of individuals who face a similar or identical situation and who are sustaining the same damage, caused by the same defendant, to collectively sue this defendant (which must be a professional). Therefore, group members do not have to bring an action or to resort to a lawyer separately.

Class actions can only be brought by approved and representative legal entities (associations or trade unions).

Class actions require taking several steps from the formal notice sent to the defendant to the indemnification of the group members.

Since 2014, 32 class actions have been brought, according to the register of the Observatoire des Actions de Groupe (the French Observatory of Class Actions). It is mainly for this reason that the French National Assembly initiated a reform of the French class action mechanism, with notably the proposal to make them an option in any area/field, without any limitation. However, the French Senate decided to keep the limited scope existing in the health and employment class action mechanisms as they currently exist.

Class actions may only be brought by an approved legal entity, such as associations or trade unions (notably for the class action for discrimination at work).

The conditions for an association to be approved vary from a type of class action to another. For example, for consumer law class actions, there are currently 15 consumer associations that are officially listed and authorised to bring class actions, while for environment class actions, the association must be an environmental protection association that has been existing for at least three years and that has a statutory activity dedicated to the environment, an association defending victims of physical injury or an association defending the economic interests of its members. The French National Assembly proposed to extend standing to non-approved associations and even ad-hoc associations specifically created to bring the action, but the French Senate removed this provision from the draft bill.

Class actions cannot be brought by individual claimants or by lawyers.

With regard to the Courts’ jurisdiction, Article 849 of the French Code of Civil Procedure provides that the Court having jurisdiction is the Civil Court of the defendant’s domicile or, if the defendant is not in France, the Paris Civil Court has jurisdiction.

Moreover, if there are several defendants, the claimant association can choose between the Civil Courts of the defendants’ different places of residence.

Therefore, all Civil Courts have jurisdiction for class actions in France. This may change with the bill that is currently being discussed, as it provides that at least two specialised courts should have jurisdiction over class actions.

The conduct and causes of action depend on the type of the class action at stake.

Class actions in health matters can only be brought when a breach of legal or contractual obligations has been committed by a producer or supplier of one of the products mentioned in Article L. 5311-1 of the French Public Health Code or by a service provider using these products. This Article lists products such as  labileblood products, breast milk collected, qualified, prepared and preserved by lactariums, in vitro diagnostic medical devices or contraceptive and birth control products.

Class actions in consumer law can only be brought when a breach has been committed by a professional regarding the sale of goods or the provision of services, or when a breach has been committed regarding the rental of real estate or by anti-competitive practices.

Class actions in environment matters can only be brought for a violation of legal obligations or the failure to comply with legal obligations relating to the protection of nature and the environment.

There are two types of class actions for discrimination. The first one can be caused by any discrimination related to the individual characteristics of individuals (origin, gender, family situation, opinion or physical appearance, for example). The second one is specific to discrimination committed by a public or private employer.

Class actions in data protection matters can be brought based on a breach of Law no. 78-17 relating to data processing, files and freedoms (such as a security breach of an operator or one of its subcontractors).

There are indeed limitations of types of claims that may be brought on a collective basis. They have different requirements. Outside of these limitations, it is not yet possible to bring a class action.

As seen in Q.1, there are limitations based on the matter at stake (data protection, discrimination, health etc..). There are also limitations regarding the type of remedies that can be sought by the claimants (see Q.10).

Moreover, there are also limitations based on the type of claimants (an individual is not authorised to bring a class action) and limited conducts and causes of actions that can be the basis of a class action (see Q. 1 and Q.4).

The current bill proposal which is being discussed aims at making some of these limitations disappear with the aim of having more of such claims being filed.

To date, there is no official record of class actions in France.

However, according to the register of the French Observatory of Class Actions, 32 class actions have been brought in France since 2014. This number has been noted by the French Constitutional Acts, Legislation and General Administration Committee (internal committee of the French National Assembly) in its report on the reform on the class actions.

This Committee also explains in its report that out of these 32 class actions, 6 of them had a “positive” outcome and concludes that these figures are “disappointing”.

In 2024, two class actions reached an end. One has been rejected by the Paris Civil Court, notably on the basis that all the claimants were not in the exact same situation, The other has notably been rejected by the Paris Court of Appeal on the basis that the alleged breaches occurred before the entry into force of the law.

Among the 32 class actions that have been brought in France, 19 of them related to consumer matters, 6 of them were brought in discrimination matters (mainly in the workplace), 3 of them were brought in health matters, 2 in data protection matters and the 2 remaining actions were brought in administrative matters.

Therefore, based on the area of law, the top three emerging business risks on which class actions are focused are:

• Consumer law
• Discrimination
• Health issues (for companies whose activity is in this area) or data protection.

Based on the type of facts resulting in a class action, the class actions were focussed on the following issues:

• Monetary issues (e.g. unlawful clause charging fees, unjustified charging of fees when returning rented phones, buyer protection fees on a website),
• Discrimination (e.g. mainly in the workplace (between men and women or against unionists for example), ethnic profiling in police controls)
• Product related issues (misleading practices, defective products, notably medical products).

It ought however to be noted that these risks have been identified based on the data published by the French Observatory of Class Actions and that most of these actions have not led to any final condemnation. For example, in January 2022, Sanofi was condemned by the Paris Civil Court. In this class action brought in the health area, Sanofi’s liability was sought as the association alleged that the Dépakine (a medicinal product) caused physical malformations and neurodevelopmental disorders in utero in foetuses of pregnant women having been treated with this medicine. This case is the first one in the scope of which the liability of a company has been acknowledged by a Court in France. However, both parties lodged an appeal against this decision which is therefore not final.

Therefore, the top three emerging business risks that are the focus of class actions are, to date, more alleged risks than risks that led to final effective condemnations. The fact that two class actions have been dismissed by the Courts in early-2024 confirms this point.

France is an opt-in jurisdiction.

Each person willing to join the action brought by an association must take active steps to join the group.

In France, class actions entail two steps. The first step consists in ruling on the liability of the defendant. If such liability is acknowledged, the Judge will define the group of persons concerned by the class action and the period of time to opt in. Then, the Judge will order the publicity of the judgment.

The aim of such publicity is to make the persons belonging to the group as defined in the judgment aware of such class action so that they can opt in the group during the defined period of time, which is a part of the second step.

In France, there is also a mechanism referred to as “simplified class actions” which applies when the victims are easily identifiable. In this situation, the victims are unaware that a class action was brought and are directly informed that they were granted a compensation. They must then accept the compensation. Therefore, even in the simplified class action, the person must take an active step (i.e. accept the compensation) to benefit from the effects of the class action.

Before starting a class action, the association must give formal notice to the defendant to stop breaching its obligations or remedy the damage sustained.

Then, the action can be brought before the Courts at least 4 months after the date of formal notice. However, there are exceptions in health and consumer class actions in which this period of time must not be complied with. Discrimination and environment class actions are also an exception as the period of time following formal notice is extended to 6 months.

With such a period of time, the defendant is given time to react. This period must be observed before the class action is brought; failing such, the class action may be deemed inadmissible.

Once the class action is brought, the following two main stages must be followed:

1. The Court rules on liability
2. The judgment is implemented.

During the first stage, the Court verifies whether or not all the conditions of the class action are met, investigates the matter and rules on the defendant’s liability, defines the group of persons concerned and determines the amount of the compensation that must be awarded to each person or determines the elements of calculation of such compensation. The Court also orders the publicity measures (where and when publicity must be implemented). Such publicity can only be implemented when the decision on liability is no longer subject to appeal.

For example, in the Sanofi case, as the decision on liability is not final because appeals have been lodged, no publicity on the judgement has been made.

The second step is the implementation of the judgment and in particular, the compensation of the members of the group. At this stage, the members of the group become aware of the procedure (following the application rules provided for in the ruling on liability) and then, receive compensation.

As the compensation that can be obtained in the scope of a class action is limited, the members of the group can then bring an individual action to obtain compensation for the damages that were not in the scope of the class action.

The remedies available to claimants vary from a type of class action to another.

In class actions in consumer law matters, the only remedy that can be sought is compensation for the material damage sustained by consumers.

In health class actions, only compensation for personal injuries can be sought.

Discrimination class actions can only be brought to obtain either an injunction to stop a nuisance or compensation for the damages resulting from the discrimination.

Environmental class actions can only be brought to stop a nuisance from being committed or to obtain compensation for personal injury or material losses resulting from damages to the environment.

Finally, data protection class actions can only be brought to stop a nuisance from being committed resulting from a breach of Law no. 78-17 relating to data processing, files and freedoms (such as a security breach of an operator or one of its subcontractors) and to obtain compensation for material damage or moral loss.

Punitive damages are not available under French law. In France, damages are fully compensated for: the victim must receive a compensation that corresponds exactly, that is no more and no less, to the damage sustained.

However, it ought to be noted that the draft bill of the French National Assembly aiming at reforming class actions in France planned to implement a “civil sanction” which is a sum that must be paid, under certain circumstances, by the defendant held liable in addition to the damages. Unlike punitive damages, the civil sanction is not paid to the claimant but to the State. After the French Administrative Supreme Court published an opinion according to which it believes that this civil sanction should not be implemented, the French Senate decided to remove the civil sanction, which is one of the major changes in the bill.

No, class actions are not subject to juries. In France, juries intervene in proceedings only for certain types of criminal offences.

Even in class actions, the damages are awarded on a case-by-case basis. According to their own loss, each group member obtains a compensation that if different than that of another member. In practice, the sums are negotiated between the association and the defendant for each group member, in compliance with the conditions imposed by the Judge. Then, it is submitted to the Court for approval.

The conditions imposed by the Judge will be determined in the ruling on the defendant’s liability.

There are no jurisdictional obstacles to class actions in France but a procedure must be followed. Failing such, it can lead to the inadmissibility of the claim.

The main steps of the procedure are the following ones:

• The association must be approved: the criteria to obtain approval depend on the type of class action. Indeed, to be considered as an approved association, the association must be representative at the national level. These associations are officially listed. On the contrary, in health, environment, discrimination and data protection matters, there is no requirement of representativeness at a national level. For example, in an environmental class action, the association can be an approved environmental protection association, an approved consumer protection association or an association whose statutory purpose includes defending victims of personal injury or the economic interests of their members and which has been existing for at least 3 years. There are therefore more associations that can bring a class action in environment matters than in consumer protection matters.
• Prove that at least two persons sustain the same situation,
• Comply with the obligations related to the prior formal notice,
• Comply with all rules of civil procedure: with regards notably to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court (depending on the defendant’s place of residence), the form and content of the writ of summons and the statute of limitation. With regard to the latter, there is no specific statute of limitation for class actions, which is therefore the same than in standard procedures. The statute of limitation is of five years following the occurrence of the damage i.e., the date on which the holders of the right to bring the claim become aware or should have become aware of the facts enabling them to exercise this right (Article 2224 of the French Civil Code).

Class actions can only be brought by associations registered in France. On the contrary, people can join the group no matter their nationality or their place of residence as long as they meet the criteria to be part of the group, as set out by the Court ruling on liability.

To date, international laws do not have any impact on the conduct of class actions in France.

Regarding EU law, the French class action mechanism already meets most requirements provided for in the EU Representative Actions Directive (e.g. there is already an action in consumer law, and the action must be brought by approved associations, which are non-profit entities, such as the “qualified entity” of the Directive). Some other EU requirements are not met yet, such as the period of establishment of the association which brings the class action, which is of 12 months in the Directive, while in French law, the association must be established for 3 or 5 years at least, depending on the type of class action.

The Directive was therefore not expected to bring major changes for the French class action mechanism (e.g., the opt-out mechanism is not imposed), which can explain why the transposition was not implemented during the transposition period. Indeed, such a text was supposed to be adopted and published on 25 December 2022 at the latest.

In France, a bill was suggested on 15 December 2022 to reform the class action mechanism. This bill contains many changes but only very few of them lead to the transposition of the Directive into French law.

Indeed, this bill only specified that it “takes into account the guidelines of the Directive”. This quote showed that the impact of the EU Directive is very low from the National Assembly’s point of view.

However, when discussing this bill, the Senate specified that some of the changes it adopted were intended “to complete transposition of the directive”, notably regarding the cross-border group action.

There is no settlement mechanism that is specific to class actions, nor specific non-judicial mechanisms.

On the contrary, one may even consider that arbitration is unavailable in class actions. Indeed, the general provisions of the French Consumer Code prohibit clauses that prevent consumers from bringing legal action, in particular by requiring them to refer to an arbitration court.

Moreover, Article L. 623-32 of the French Consumer Code prohibits clauses by which consumers waive their right to join a class action. Therefore, consumers cannot agree with a clause waiving their right to join a class action in favour of an arbitration clause.

However, the parties always have the possibility to agree to withdrawal of the claim. These negotiations can be carried out through mediation or between outside counsels (which is the only way in France to ensure the confidentiality of the discussions). Several class actions ended in this way in France.

Yes, a judicial oversight for settlement can exist during the first step of class actions when the negotiations are carried out through a mediation (by the association for the group members). Indeed, if this option is chosen and an agreement found between the parties, it will be submitted to the Court that will approve it or not, after having determined whether it is in the interests of those to whom it is intended to apply. If the agreement is approved, it is then made public to allow people to join the class action within the period of time allotted.

This judicial oversight does not exist when the negotiations are carried out by outside counsels. When an agreement is found between the parties, the claimant can withdraw its claim without providing any explanation or indication on the agreement found between the parties.

Class actions do not interact, as such, with regulatory enforcement findings. These are different and independent procedures. However, if a regulator investigates a matter or a company and publicises it, its findings can be used by the claimants in the class action as evidence to support the breach that they are alleging.

For example, the association UFC-Que Choisir has brought a class action against a bank. Prior to this class action, the bank had been sanctioned by the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (“AMF” – authority controlling the financial markets). In the scope of the class action, the association required the Court to grant it access to the AMF file.

According to the French Observatory of Class Actions, the Paris Civil Court granted UFC-Que Choisir access to the AMF investigation file.

To date, we are not aware of any class action that could have been brought in France for ESG matters.

However, this is legally feasible as long as it is proved that the group members have sustained a damage (financial, personal, moral) caused by an ESG issue.

With regard to the scope of the action, such an action could be brought under several types of class action depending on the facts at stake (environmental, consumer or even discrimination class actions).

For example, an ESG class action which is brought against a company on the grounds of a violation committed in relation to the protection of nature and the environment could be brought in the scope of the environmental class action.

Another example would be if a company wrongly claims that its product or its activity is environmentally friendly (because of a low carbon print for example), consumers having purchased such a product or service based on these claims could attempt bringing a class action within the scope of the consumer class action for misleading practices.

However, and as a reminder, such actions have not been identified in France to date.

The existing laws and decrees on class actions do not permit nor prohibit litigation funding. However, the French Supreme Court rendered a decision on a third-party funding issue in which the Court did not prohibit this mechanism (French Supreme Court, First Civil Chamber, 23 November 2011, no. 10-16.770).

It is therefore possible in France for a third party to fund proceedings. Nonetheless, lawyers and parties accepting third-party funding must ensure that the professional privilege is not violated. The lawyer must also ensure that the third-party funding does not raise any conflict of interest.

We are not aware of the use of such mechanism in a French class action to date.

It should however be noted that third-party funding will evolve in France in the near future, with fundings by the State. Indeed, the draft bill to reform French class actions provides that it will be possible for the State to pay in advance the fees incurred by serious class actions. This will help the initiation of class actions since to date, the fees to be paid when bringing a class action are considered as an obstacle to the mechanism. The French Senate has retained this proposal when examining the bill.

Contingency fees are permissible in France but only if they are part of the fees. Indeed, according to French ethical rules for lawyers, being paid by contingency fees only is prohibited. The lawyer must charge fees to be paid regardless of the result of the action. The contingency fees could then constitute an other part of the fees.

Yes, a Court can hand down an adverse costs order against the unsuccessful party but not for the full costs paid by the successful party.

The mechanisms for determining the burden of costs of the proceedings between the parties are provided for by Articles 696 and 700 of the French Code of Civil Procedure.

Article 696 provides that the unsuccessful party bears the costs, fees and taxable charges relating to the proceedings, unless otherwise decided by the court.

Article 700 grants the successful party the right to ask the court to be reimbursed of its expenses by the unsuccessful party. The expenses covered by Article 700 are the ones that are not covered by Article 696, such as the lawyer’s fees, travel expenses or private expert expenses. This being said, it ought to be mentioned that all fees are never reimbursed in the scope of French proceedings. Instead, the Court determines the amount to be granted based on the amount of the claim and “equity”, meaning what it deems to be reasonable fees.

Yes, a bill is currently being discussed to reform the French class action mechanisms. The aim of such bill is to simplify the access to class actions in France as the number of class actions brought to date is considered disappointing.

In France, the adoption of a bill is complete after the agreement of the two chambers of the French Parliament (the National Assembly and the Senate) on the same bill. To date, these two chambers did not find an agreement as the French Senate removed several of the proposals of the National Assembly as it considered the bill as suggested by the National Assembly as too “radical”.

The main points at stake in the draft bill are the following:

• implementation of a single and unified type of class action mechanism. Therefore, the different types of class actions (environmental, consumer, data, etc..) provided for in various laws and Codes will disappear , partially only, as the Senate wants to keep a restricted scope for the health and employment (to discrimination only) class actions.
• Full compensation of the victims will become the main purpose of the class action. Therefore, the restrictions on the types of damage that can be compensated will disappear.
• Extension of standing to more associations: this was in the bill drafted by the National Assembly but it has been restricted by the Senate.
• the Public Prosecutor will be able to bring class actions or to join to an action brought by an association.
• the formal notice step will disappear: this was also a wish of the National Assembly. The Senate, on the contrary, decided to generalise the formal notice.
• greater publicity will be given to the class actions brought, notably through a registry of the ongoing class actions. The French Senate extended this publicity to withdrawn or closed class actions to and mediation agreements approved.
• creation of a “civil sanction” that would have to be paid to the State under certain circumstances: this was in the bill drafted by the National Assembly. The Senate completely removed this provision fearing the “risk of disproportionate penalties” and anticipating that this would be contrary to the French Constitution.
• removal of some of the “financial barriers” through the payment in advance of the claimant’s fees by the State, that can be made under certain circumstances.
• Jurisdiction granted to specialised courts, the Senate specified that at least two Courts must be appointed.

The bill was adopted by the French National Assembly on 8 March 2023, then discussed, partially modified and adopted by the Senate on 6 February 2024, in a version intended to be less “radical” than the one of the French National Assembly. The version of the bill as modified and adopted by the Senate now returns to the National Assembly where, after for further debates, it could be adopted as such within a few months or subject to further changes.

To date, it is not possible to say when the bill will be definitively adopted and enter into force.