Seizing a Debtor’s Assets in France: Legal Conditions, Enforceable Titles, and Risks for Creditors

1. Seizure in France Is Not Automatic: The Foundational Requirement of an Enforceable Title

In France, debt collection through seizure is strictly regulated and never automatic. Before a creditor may instruct a commissaire de justice (bailiff) to seize a debtor’s assets, French law imposes a fundamental prerequisite: the creditor must hold an enforceable title (titre exécutoire) establishing that the debt is certain, liquid, and due.

This requirement stems from the core principle that enforcement measures constitute a serious interference with property rights and therefore require prior judicial or equivalent authority. In practice, the enforceable title most commonly takes the form of a court decision ordering the debtor to pay.

Even once such a decision exists, enforcement cannot begin immediately. The judgment must first be formally served on the debtor by a commissaire de justice. Without proper service, any seizure is void, regardless of the debt’s legitimacy.

Finally, seizure may only target assets belonging to the condemned debtor. A judgment obtained against a company does not, by itself, allow the creditor to seize the personal assets of shareholders or partners, even in partnerships where liability may otherwise be extensive.

For creditors, especially foreign businesses, this preliminary phase is often underestimated. Yet it determines the entire enforceability of the recovery process.

2. What Constitutes an Enforceable Title Under French Law?

French enforcement law recognises a broad range of enforceable titles, extending well beyond traditional civil judgments.

The most common enforceable title is a judicial decision ordering payment. This includes not only civil and commercial judgments but also criminal court decisions awarding damages to a civil party. Such decisions allow even real estate seizures, provided procedural rules are respected.

When a judgment has been confirmed on appeal, both the first-instance judgment and the appellate decision must be served on the debtor before enforcement can begin. Failure to serve both decisions exposes the seizure to nullification.

French law also recognises alternative dispute resolution outcomes as enforceable titles, provided they meet strict formal criteria. Agreements reached through mediation, conciliation, or participatory procedures may become enforceable if:

• They are countersigned by lawyers representing each party, and

• They are granted enforceable force by the competent court registry.

Similarly, a judgment approving a settlement agreement constitutes an enforceable title even if the settlement itself is not physically attached, provided its terms are clearly incorporated into the decision.

Where a party seeks to enforce a settlement that has not yet been judicially approved, it must first apply for homologation. The resulting order must then be notified to the opposing party before any seizure is attempted.

Finally, French and European law allow creditors to rely on a European Enforcement Order, enabling cross-border enforcement throughout the EU without exequatur. This tool is particularly valuable for international debt collection strategies involving assets located outside France.

3. Notarial Deeds and Unpaid Cheques: Enforcing Without Prior Litigation

French law offers creditors powerful alternatives to court proceedings in certain situations.

A debt recorded in a notarial deed bearing the enforcement formula has the same force as a judgment. Creditors holding such an instrument may instruct a commissaire de justice directly, without first obtaining a court ruling. This mechanism is frequently used in real estate leases, secured loans, and structured financial transactions.

Importantly, the existence of a notarial enforceable title does not prevent the creditor from initiating court proceedings to obtain a judgment confirming the debt. Strategic reasons—such as interest calculation, liability extension, or procedural consolidation—may justify such an approach.

However, enforcement based on a notarial deed is strictly limited to the obligations expressly contained in that deed. A subsequent amendment or additional loan, even if economically linked, cannot serve as a basis for seizure unless it too is notarised and enforceable.

Unpaid cheques constitute another notable exception. When a cheque is returned unpaid, the creditor may obtain an enforceable certificate directly from a commissaire de justice, without judicial intervention. This accelerated mechanism reflects the strict payment discipline attached to negotiable instruments under French law.

4. The Principle of Proportionality: Seizure Must Not Be Abusive or Unnecessary

French enforcement law grants creditors freedom to choose the most effective recovery measure. That freedom, however, is not absolute.

All enforcement measures must comply with the principle of necessity and proportionality. Seizure must be appropriate to the amount of the debt and the debtor’s behaviour. A measure that goes beyond what is reasonably required to secure payment may be challenged and lifted.

If a seizure is deemed abusive or unnecessary, the debtor may obtain its release. In certain procedures, such as wage garnishment, prior judicial authorisation may even be refused.

The consequences for the creditor can be severe. French courts may award:

• Compensatory damages to the debtor

• A civil fine of up to €10,000 for abusive litigation conduct

The risk is heightened where enforcement is carried out on the basis of a judgment that is provisionally enforceable. In such cases, the creditor acts at its own risk. If the judgment is later overturned on appeal, the creditor must fully restore the debtor’s position, either in kind or financially.

This restitution obligation applies even where the creditor acted in good faith.

5. Judicial Scrutiny of Enforcement Timing and Asset Choice

French courts do not assess proportionality in the abstract. They examine the context, timing, and practical impact of enforcement.

Rapid enforcement shortly after service of a judgment, even during periods when businesses operate at reduced capacity, is not inherently abusive. Courts recognise that creditors are not required to wait indefinitely or to exhaust amicable attempts before enforcing a valid judgment.

Conversely, the choice of assets may raise issues. Seizing assets that are essential to the debtor’s professional activity—such as a work vehicle—may be contested. While the enforcement judge has discretion, creditors must anticipate that appellate courts may take a different view.

Where enforcement proceeds despite an appeal and assets are sold, reversal of the decision exposes the creditor to full liability for the loss, including consequential damages.

Similarly, enforcement actions leading to eviction or business interruption may trigger substantial compensation claims if the underlying decision is later overturned.

6. Enforcement Is Personal to the Debtor—but Strategic Options Remain

Seizure may only be carried out against the debtor designated in the enforceable title. A judgment against a company does not extend to shareholders, partners, or affiliates unless they were personally bound.

That said, creditors are not without alternatives. Where multiple debtors exist, enforcement against one does not preclude immediate action against another. The same applies to guarantors, who remain fully liable even if the principal debtor benefits from procedural relief—subject only to limited exceptions in conciliation proceedings.

Creditors may also rely on set-off, where mutual debts exist, notwithstanding enforcement delays or judicial payment deadlines.

7. Conclusion: Enforcement in France Requires Strategy, Not Speed

Seizing a debtor’s assets in France is a powerful but legally sensitive operation. The system is designed to balance creditor rights with debtor protection, placing procedural rigor at the centre of enforcement.

For creditors, success depends not on haste, but on strategic sequencing: obtaining the right enforceable title, serving it correctly, selecting proportionate measures, and anticipating judicial scrutiny at every stage.

Poorly planned enforcement can transform a valid claim into a liability. Well-executed enforcement, by contrast, remains one of the most effective tools for debt recovery in France.