The seizure of bank accounts as an emergency measure, which is in fact, an attachment of moneys available on that account (“saisie-conservatoire de créance“) is one of the most powerful tools available under French law to secure payment of a monetary claim before a court judgment is obtained.
When used correctly, it allows a creditor to freeze funds held by a bank on behalf of a debtor, preventing any dissipation of assets while litigation is pending.
This mechanism plays a decisive role in situations involving insolvency risk, international debtors, or deliberate obstruction by the debtor. Far from being an exceptional remedy, it is a cornerstone of strategic debt recovery in France.
1. Why Seize a Bank Account Before Judgment?
In many disputes, the main risk faced by a creditor is not winning the case on the merits, but being paid at the end of the proceedings. Court litigation can take months or even years, and during that time a debtor may organise insolvency, transfer funds abroad, or empty bank accounts.
French law expressly allows creditors to anticipate this risk. A conservatory seizure of a bank account aims to preserve assets, not to enforce payment immediately. Its purpose is to ensure that, once a judgment is obtained, funds will still exist and remain available.
This measure is particularly justified where:
-
the debtor shows signs of financial distress,
-
previous payment incidents have occurred,
-
the debtor refuses to respond to formal notices,
-
assets can be easily transferred or concealed, or
-
the debtor is foreign but holds assets in France.
The effectiveness of the conservatory seizure lies in its surprise effect. The debtor is not informed in advance. The seizure is served directly on the bank, which must immediately block the funds.
2. Legal Basis and Nature of the Measure
Conservatory seizures (“saisie-conservatoire“) are governed by Articles L. 511-1 et seq. and R. 511-1 et seq. of the French Code des procédures civiles d’exécution.
A conservatory seizure of a bank account allows a creditor to freeze a monetary claim belonging to the debtor and held by a third party, typically a banking institution.
The debtor remains the account holder, but loses the ability to dispose of the seized funds.
Unlike enforcement measures such as saisie-attribution, a conservatory seizure:
-
does not require an enforceable title,
-
does not transfer ownership of funds to the creditor,
-
is strictly provisional,
-
must be followed by proceedings on the merits.
Its sole function is to secure future enforcement.
3. Which Bank Accounts Can Be Seized?
A conservatory seizure may be carried out on any bank account located in France, regardless of:
-
the nationality of the debtor,
-
the nationality of the creditor,
-
the governing law of the underlying contract,
-
or the place where the dispute arose.
Under French case law, a bank account is deemed to be located at the branch where it is held. As a result, accounts opened with French banks or French branches of foreign banks fall within the jurisdiction of French courts.
Joint accounts may also be seized. In such cases, the seizure affects the entire balance, subject to the right of the non-debtor co-holder to seek release of funds that can be proven to be personal property.
4. Conditions for Obtaining a Conservatory Seizure – A Prior Judicial Authorization
Judicial Authorisation: Which Judge and How?
In principle, a conservatory seizure requires prior judicial authorisation.
Jurisdiction lies with:
-
the juge de l’exécution of the debtor’s domicile, or
-
where the claim is commercial and no proceedings have yet been initiated, the President of the Commercial Court.
The request is made by way of a non-adversarial application (requête). The debtor is not heard at this stage, and the judicial seizure, if authorized and enforced, will come as a surprise (which is its ultimate purpose, in order to prevent the debtor from hiding the assets).
The judge assesses the two statutory conditions and, if satisfied, authorises the seizure up to a specified amount. The order is typically rendered quickly, sometimes within days in urgent cases.
In certain situations listed in Article L. 511-2 of the Code, no prior authorisation is required, notably where the creditor already holds:
-
an enforceable title,
-
an unpaid cheque,
-
an unpaid accepted bill of exchange,
-
or an unpaid written lease.
French law imposes two cumulative conditions, for a judicial authorization to attach to be granted.
A Claim Well Founded in Its Principle
The creditor must demonstrate that its claim is prima facie valid. The claim does not need to be liquid or due, nor does its amount need to be definitively fixed. Claims for damages, contractual penalties, or indemnification may qualify.
The Cour de cassation has consistently held that the creditor does not need to establish a “certain” claim, but merely one that appears sufficiently grounded in fact and law (Cass. civ. 1re, 2 February 1999, no. 96-16.718).
Supporting documents such as contracts, invoices, correspondence, or prior court decisions are essential.
Circumstances Threatening Recovery
The creditor must also show that recovery of the claim is threatened. French courts interpret this requirement pragmatically, in order not to neutralise the preventive nature of the measure.
Threats to recovery may result from:
-
non-payment despite formal notices,
-
repeated delays or evasive behaviour,
-
known financial difficulties,
-
press reports or public filings,
-
asset transfers or restructuring operations.
The creditor is not required to prove fraud. Mere risk is sufficient.
5. Implementation by the Judicial Officer and Role of the Bank
Once authorisation is obtained, the creditor instructs a commissaire de justice to serve the act of seizure on the bank.
From the exact moment of service:
-
the bank must immediately block the accounts,
-
the seized sums become unavailable to the debtor,
-
the bank must identify the balances and existing constraints.
The bank is subject to strict obligations of declaration. Any failure to block funds or to provide accurate information may expose it to liability. French courts regularly sanction banks that breach these duties.
6. Effects of the Seizure and Protected Amounts
The seizure freezes the balance existing at the time of service. Incoming funds after that moment are not seized.
French law nevertheless protects a minimum subsistence amount, known as the solde bancaire insaisissable, which must remain available to the debtor. Certain social benefits are also entirely exempt from seizure.
These protections are mandatory and automatically applied by the bank.
7. Obligations Following the Seizure: The One-Month Rule
A conservatory seizure cannot exist in isolation. Article R. 511-7 requires the creditor to initiate proceedings on the merits within one month of the seizure.
This may take the form of:
-
an action before the competent court,
-
summary proceedings,
-
an injunction to pay,
-
or even a criminal complaint seeking damages.
Failure to act within this strict time limit renders the seizure void.
8. What Can the Debtor Do?
The debtor is informed of the seizure after it has been carried out. Several remedies are available.
Application for Release (Mainlevée)
The debtor may apply to the judge who authorised the seizure to obtain its release. Grounds include:
-
absence of a valid claim,
-
lack of threat to recovery,
-
procedural irregularities,
-
or disproportionate character of the measure.
The burden of proof rests on the creditor, not the debtor (Cass. civ. 2e, 6 October 2005, no. 04-12.063).
Substitution of Security
The debtor may offer an alternative guarantee, such as a bank guarantee or escrow deposit. Where a qualifying bank guarantee is offered, the judge must order release of the seizure.
Creditor’s Liability
Even where the creditor acted in good faith, an unjustified or excessive seizure may give rise to damages. French case law accepts strict liability, particularly where the seizure blocked assets far exceeding the claim or caused abnormal prejudice.
9. Conversion into Enforcement Seizure
Once the creditor obtains an enforceable title, the conservatory seizure may be converted into a saisie-attribution. At that point, ownership of the seized sums is transferred to the creditor by operation of law.
Timing is crucial. If insolvency proceedings are opened before conversion, the seizure loses effect and the funds fall into the collective estate. If conversion occurs beforehand, the creditor retains priority.
International Debtors and Strategic Importance
Conservatory seizure of bank accounts is especially effective against foreign debtors with assets in France. French courts do not examine the governing law of the contract at this stage. What matters is the location of the asset.
Aircraft proceeds, shipping revenues, client receivables and bank accounts located in France may all be frozen, even when the debtor is domiciled abroad and litigation is pending in another jurisdiction.
French enforcement law is fundamentally asset-driven, not debtor-driven. What matters is not where the debtor is domiciled, but where the asset is located. A bank account is deemed to be located at the branch where it is held. As a result, any account opened with a French bank, or a French branch of a foreign bank falls within the territorial jurisdiction of French courts, regardless of:
-
the nationality of the debtor,
-
the nationality of the creditor,
-
the place of performance of the contract,
-
or the governing law of the underlying obligation.
French courts do not require the dispute itself to have any substantive connection with France. The mere presence of funds in France is sufficient to justify judicial intervention.
This approach has been consistently confirmed by French case law and underpins the attractiveness of France as an enforcement hub for international creditors.
Why Foreign Creditors Use Conservatory Seizure in France
In cross-border disputes, delay is often fatal. A debtor located abroad may:
-
transfer funds electronically within minutes,
-
reorganise assets across jurisdictions,
-
rely on the length of foreign proceedings to empty accounts.
A conservatory seizure allows the creditor to act immediately and without warning.
Its strategic value is particularly high when:
-
the debtor conducts international business but banks in France,
-
the creditor anticipates lengthy proceedings abroad,
-
enforcement abroad would be uncertain or slow,
-
insolvency risks are emerging,
-
or the debtor is deliberately evasive.
French law expressly permits conservatory seizure before any judgment, provided statutory conditions are met.
In addition, there is no requirement that the underlying contract or other relationship having given rise to the claim be governed by French law, or that subsequent proceedings on the merits be borought before a french court.
A critical point for foreign creditors is that French law does not require the underlying contract to be governed by French law.
The claim may arise from an English-law contract, a New York-law agreement, a UAE-law supply contract, or any other foreign legal framework.
Similarly, proceedings on the merits may be pending abroad, contemplated abroad, or not yet initiated.
French courts only assess two issues: whether the claim appears well founded in principle, and whether recovery is threatened.
They do not rule on jurisdiction over the merits of the dispute.
Conclusion
The conservatory seizure of bank accounts is a decisive instrument in French debt recovery. It allows creditors to neutralise the risk of insolvency, preserve assets, and transform litigation into effective payment.
Its power is matched by its technical complexity and the risks it entails. Proper use requires rigorous legal analysis, strategic timing and strict procedural compliance.
When mastered, it is often the difference between a favourable judgment and an uncollectible one.
Bank accounts, goods, aircraft & vessels.
