France

Under French law, class actions have been subject to a series of successive legislative reforms that have progressively shaped the current regime:

• Law No. 2014-344 of 17 March 2014 relating to “consumer” rights, known as the “Hamon Law” (Loi Hamon), created the first French class action regime, the scope of which was limited to consumer matters.
• Laws No. 2016-41 of 26 January and No. 2016-1547 of 18 November 2016 extended Law No. 2014-344’s scope of application to health, discrimination, personal data and environmental matters.
• Law No. 2025-391 of 30 April 2025, known as the Dispositions Diverses d’Adaptation au Droit de l’Union Européenne Law (the “DDADUE Law”), transposed in France the European Directive (EU) 2020/1828 of 25 November 2020, and repealed the existing sectoral legislations in order to create a unified and harmonised regime for class actions that is now applicable regardless of the areas of law in question.

Since 2014, fewer than 40 class actions have been initiated before French courts. They were mainly introduced in the area of consumer law. Of these actions, only two judgments finding liability have been issued by French courts. Such a small number of proceedings, combined with the past sectorisation of the legal framework, have, in particular, fuelled the 2025 reform introduced by the DDADUE Law in favour of a unified regime aimed at strengthening the effectiveness and attractiveness of French class action.

A class action is a collective proceeding, based on an opt-in mechanism, aimed at either or both compensating for serial damages and/or ensuring that a legal (including tort) or contractual breach cease.

The new unified regime established by the DDADUE Law, which is applicable to all proceedings filed on or after 2 May 2025, is characterised by:

• a procedural unification (see Section 2.2, below), with the exception of class actions in the field of health, which still have a specific regime;
• the duality of the action (i.e. the cessation of a breach) together with compensation of damages (see Section 3.1, below);
• the authorisation of third-party funding under strict conditions of independence and transparency (see Section 3.2, below);
• a wider definition of the scope of standing (see Section 3.4, below);
• an opt-in system as opposed to the U.S. class action system (see Section 3.5, below); and
• the introduction of a new remedy: a civil penalty for fraudulent misconduct (faute dolosive) (see Section 3.8, below).

Since the DDADUE Law, the sectors in which class action is possible are no longer limited: class actions now apply to all areas of law, including consumer, health, environment, industrial risk matters, etc.

All types of damages can also now be compensated: financial, material, physical and moral.

Article 16, I, A of the DDADUE Law defines the class action as a judicial proceeding filed by a claimant acting on behalf of several individuals or legal entities — either public or private — having suffered a similar contractual or legal (including tort) breach, committed by an individual or legal entity — either private or public — acting within the scope of or in connection with its professional activity.

The DDADUE Law introduces separate procedural timeframes depending on the objective pursued: cessation of a breach, or compensation of damages (see Section 3.3, below).

It also gives exclusive jurisdiction to specially designated courts in order to strengthen the expertise of the courts and ensure consistent case law. Decree No. 2025-653 of 16 July 2025 sets the jurisdiction of the eight competent civil courts to hear class actions: Bordeaux, Lille, Lyon, Marseille, Nancy, Paris, Rennes and Fort-de-France.

The DDADUE Law now authorises claimants to seek funding for class actions from third parties provided that (Article 16, I, D):

• it should not undermine the claimant’s independence and should not have the purpose or effect of leading the third party to influence the introduction or progress of the class action; and
• it is subject to publication under the terms and conditions set out in Decree No. 2025-1191 of 10 December 2025.

In addition, the DDADUE Law has created a specific fund to finance class actions, which is financed by:

• the proceeds of civil penalty that may be ordered by courts as provided for in the new Article 1245 of the French Civil Code (see Section 3.8, below); and
• liquidated penalties (astreintes) (DDADUE Law, Article 16, II).

Damages claims proceed in three stages (DDADUE Law, Article 16, III, A, 1):

• Ruling on liability. The court rules on the defendant’s liability based on at least two individual cases. If liability is established, the court defines the criteria for eligibility for the class, the damages to be compensated, the method of calculation for compensation, the terms and conditions for publication of the decision and the deadline for victims to join the class.
• Opt-in phase. Victims who meet the criteria may join the group to obtain compensation within a period set by the court of between two months and five years from the publication of the decision on liability.
• Compensation phase. The court rules on any disputes regarding compensation, allowing the parties to negotiate the terms of compensation, which will then be formally ratified by the court.

Cessation claims are simplified proceedings in which the claimant does not have to prove the actual damage (DDADUE Law, Article 16, II). Once the court finds that a breach has occurred, it has the power to order the defendant to cease the breach within a specified period and to order any appropriate measures to that end. In particular, the court may appoint a third party to ensure that the breach ceases. The court order can be coupled with a penalty payment, which is now allocated to a fund dedicated to financing class actions (see Section 3.2, above). Publicity measures may also be ordered at the defendant’s expense.

From a general procedural perspective, prior formal notice is no longer a condition for the admissibility of class actions, with the exception of those brought on the basis of the provisions of the French Labor Code (DDADUE Law, Article 16, I, F).

The following entities have standing to introduce, on behalf of either individuals or legal entities, class actions before French Courts (DDADUE Law, Article 16, I, C):

• Non-profit associations approved by the Direction Générale de la Concurrence, de la Consommation et de la Répression des Fraudes (DGCCRF). To be approved, the association must:
  • prove that it has lasted for at least one year;
  • have a statutory purpose directly related to the defence of the interests that are being damaged as part of the class action;
  • not be under insolvency collective proceedings;
  • provide guarantees of independence; and
  • publicly disclose information about its purpose, activities, sources of funding and organisation. The list of approved entities is publicly available on the DGCCRF’s website.
• Associations that are duly registered but not approved. They must provide evidence of two years of effective and public activity; and their statutory purpose must include the defence of interests that are being damaged as part of the class action. These non-approved associations may only bring actions for cessation claims, excluding actions for compensation.
• Representative trade unions and trade union organisations that meet the conditions set out in the DDADUE Law in reference with the French Labor Code.
• The French public prosecutor.
• Entities of European Union Member States that are said to be “qualified” to act in France (DDADUE Law, Article 16, X, A).

As opposed to the U.S. class action system, French class action proceedings for compensation work on an opt-in basis, whereby each victim must expressly indicate their wish to join the group.

The court sets the timeframe within which victims who meet the membership criteria may join the group in order to obtain compensation for their damages, ranging from two months to five years from the publication of the decision on liability (DDADUE Law, Article 16, III, A, 1).

The DDADUE Law granted exclusive jurisdiction to only eight French civil courts (Bordeaux, Lille, Lyon, Marseille, Nancy, Paris, Rennes and Fort-de-France) (French Judicial Organisation Code, Article L. 211-15).

French courts are responsible for assessing the breach and the liability, although they do not conduct any investigation. Under French law, the burden of proof lies with the claimant (French Civil Code, Article 1353).

French courts, however, play an active role in detecting conflicts of interest (DDADUE, Article 16, I, E). They may:

• automatically dismiss the case on the grounds of a conflict of interest between the claimant and the victims it represents (French Code of Civil Procedure, Article 849-12); or
• require the production of documents proving the absence of a conflict of interest.

As opposed to common law countries, French civil procedure does not have a separate discovery phase requiring parties to disclose all relevant documents prior to trial.

However, class action claimants may rely on French standard evidentiary tools such as “in futurum investigations measures” (mesures d’instruction in futurum), provided there is a legitimate reason (motif légitime) to preserve or establish, prior to the proceedings, evidence of facts on which the outcome may depend (French Code of Civil Procedure, Article 145).

Class action claimants may cumulatively request (DDADUE Law, Article 16, I, A):

• the cessation of the breach(s) identified; and
• compensation for the damage suffered in accordance with the French principle of full compensation (réparation intégrale), which implies that the damages awarded to a victim must compensate the damage suffered, without resulting in any loss or profit for the victim.

In addition, the DDADUE Law has created a civil penalty in case of fraudulent misconduct (faute dolosive) (French Civil Code, Article 1254). Such civil penalty can be imposed at the request of the public prosecutor before civil courts provided two cumulative conditions are met:

• the author of the damage deliberately committed the breach with a view to obtaining an undue gain or saving; and
• the breach caused one or more damages to several individuals or legal entities in a similar situation.

The amount of the penalty will be proportional to the gravity of the breach and the profit gained, up to a limit of five times the illegal profit for a legal entity.

The amounts collected under such civil penalty are paid to the fund and dedicated to financing class actions (see Section 2.2, above).

The DDADUE Law recognises mediation (médiation) as an alternative method of resolving class action disputes (DDADUE Law, Article 16, III, C, 1).

At each stage of the proceedings, the court may, with the agreement of the parties, appoint a mediator to seek an amicable agreement.

Although optional, mediation is encouraged to promote a faster and amicable resolution of the case.

The agreement, even if partial, must be approved by the court, which ensures that it protects the interests of the group members. Once approved, it becomes enforceable. The court may refuse approval in the event of a conflict of interest or insufficient protection of the victims (DDADUE Law, Article 16, I, E). The agreement must also provide for publicity measures and the terms and conditions for benefiting from it.

For the compensation of the victims, the claimant must open a specific bank account with the French Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations on behalf of the group of victims as defined by the judge (French Code of Civil Procedure, Article 849-20).

Any amount received as part of the class action must be immediately deposited by the claimant into this account.

Class action, either aimed at ceasing the breach or compensating for damages, suspends the statute of limitations for individual actions (DDADUE law, Article 16, IX).

Decisions issued by the court have the force of res judicata (autorité de la chose jugée) with respect to each member of the group. However, membership in the group does not prevent a victim bringing an individual action to obtain compensation for damages that are not covered by the class action.

The DDADUE Law has created a “2.0 class action” (i.e. a unified system that is more accessible, responsive and dissuasive), strengthening the protection of collective interests.

The widening of the scope of standing (non-approved associations, trade unions, public prosecutors, European entities) and the suppression of the prior formal notice (except in the labour sector) are designed to encourage effective use of the mechanism.

The new civil penalty for fraudulent misconduct represents a significant step up in the response to serial infringements, while remaining distinct from U.S. punitive damages.

Strictly regulated third-party funding aims to ensure the long-term effectiveness of collective litigation, particularly for associations.

Overall, the DDADUE law reform provides France with a modernised and ambitious framework for collective justice.