Short answer. A judgment handed down in New York, Chicago or London allows no enforcement in France until a French court has declared it enforceable: that is exequatur. For a United States judgment there is no convention between France and the United States, so the tribunal judiciaire checks three conditions laid down by the Cour de cassation in Cornelissen on 20 February 2007: the jurisdiction of the foreign court, conformity with French international public policy, and the absence of fraud, without re-trying the case. For an English judgment, the Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 has applied since 1 July 2025 to proceedings begun after that date, with limited grounds of refusal. Allow six to eighteen months, and secure the debtor’s assets from the outset.
A creditor who has won abroad often believes the job is done. He is in fact halfway. A judgment has force only in the territory of the State that gave it; outside the European Union, where judgments circulate without formality, every border is a procedure. What follows is the route from a US or English judgment to an enforcement measure in France: the texts, the conditions, the documents, the timescales, the traps, and how to secure the assets while the court decides.
Three regimes, according to where the judgment comes from
The starting point governs everything. For a judgment given in a Member State of the European Union in civil and commercial matters, the Brussels I bis Regulation abolished exequatur: the decision is enforced in France on production of a copy and the article 53 certificate. For a United States judgment there is neither a bilateral nor a multilateral convention in force between France and the United States: the United States signed the 2019 Hague Convention but has not ratified it. The regime is therefore French common law, built by case law.
For an English judgment the position has changed twice. Since Brexit, Brussels I bis no longer applies to proceedings begun in the United Kingdom after 31 December 2020. The Hague Convention of 30 June 2005 on choice of court agreements has covered, since 2021, judgments given under an exclusive jurisdiction clause. And since 1 July 2025, the date of its entry into force for the United Kingdom, the Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments applies between France and the United Kingdom, for judgments given in proceedings begun after that date. An English judgment from proceedings begun in 2024 still falls under French common law; one from proceedings begun in 2026 falls under the Convention. The difference is not merely formal: under the 2019 Convention the French court may refuse recognition only on the grounds exhaustively listed, and the jurisdiction of the court of origin is assessed against a list of connecting factors fixed by the Convention, whereas under common law the French court has a broader margin, particularly on indirect jurisdiction.
The three common-law conditions: the Cornelissen judgment
Outside any convention, exequatur of a foreign judgment follows the conditions set by the First Civil Chamber of the Cour de cassation in Cornelissen on 20 February 2007 (no. 05-14.082). The French court checks three things. The indirect jurisdiction of the foreign court, established where the dispute is characteristically connected to the country whose court was seised and the choice of that forum was not fraudulent: a New York judgment against a French company that contracted in New York, delivered in New York or accepted a New York jurisdiction clause satisfies the condition; a judgment obtained in a State unconnected with the dispute does not. Conformity of the decision with French international public policy, both substantive and procedural. And the absence of evasion of the law.
That judgment removed a fourth condition which had existed since Munzer in 1964, review of the law applied by the foreign court: the French court no longer verifies that the foreign tribunal decided according to the law the French conflict rule would have designated. Two principles complete the picture. The exequatur court does not re-try the merits: it may neither re-examine the evidence, nor reduce the award, nor substitute its own assessment for that of the foreign court. And the decision must be enforceable in its country of origin: a judgment under appeal with suspensive effect, or a provisional decision, cannot be declared enforceable in France.
What defeats an application: procedural public policy, default, punitive damages
In practice the fight concentrates on procedural public policy. Was the defendant properly summoned to the foreign proceedings, in time to defend himself? A default judgment obtained in the United States on service at a former address, or by a method French law does not recognise, is the most frequent ground of failure. Is the decision reasoned? French law requires the foreign court to have set out its reasons, or failing that requires the applicant to produce documents capable of serving as an equivalent, which for a jury verdict or a default judgment means producing the pleadings, the case file and the interlocutory orders. Was the defendant able to appeal?
Punitive damages, peculiar to United States law, are not in themselves contrary to French international public policy: the Cour de cassation so held in Fountaine Pajot on 1 December 2010 (no. 09-13.303). But it added that exequatur is refused where the sum awarded is disproportionate to the loss suffered and to the debtor’s breaches. A judgment awarding one million dollars of compensatory damages and ten million of punitive damages will not be enforced in France for those ten million. The well-advised creditor therefore seeks partial exequatur, for the compensatory part alone, rather than risking outright refusal. Other obstacles are less visible: a decision reached at the end of a US class action raises the question of representation of the class; a decision against a foreign State or a public entity meets immunity from enforcement, since articles L. 111-1-1 and following of the Code of civil enforcement procedures make any measure against the property of a foreign State subject to prior judicial authorisation.
The procedure before the tribunal judiciaire
The application is made to the tribunal judiciaire, which hears, before a single judge, applications for recognition and exequatur of foreign judgments and public acts as well as of French or foreign arbitral awards (article R. 212-8 of the Code of judicial organisation). Representation by a French lawyer is compulsory. The territorially competent court is in principle that of the defendant’s domicile or, failing a domicile in France, that of the intended place of enforcement. Proceedings are begun by writ: they are adversarial, the debtor is summoned and may raise every point arising from the conditions set out above.
The documents are decisive and must be assembled before the writ. An authenticated copy of the judgment, legalised or bearing the apostille of the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961, to which both the United States and the United Kingdom are parties. Proof that the decision is enforceable and, as the case may be, final in its country of origin: a court certificate, a certificate of no appeal, or a local lawyer’s attestation. Proof of proper service of the originating process on the defendant and of service of the judgment. A translation into French by a sworn translator. And, for decisions with little or no reasoning, the papers from the foreign proceedings that allow the reasoning to be reconstructed. An incomplete file does not defeat the application, but it delays it by several months while the missing documents are obtained abroad.
Protecting the assets while the court decides
A debtor who learns of an exequatur application has time to organise his insolvency. The creditor must therefore, before or at the same time as the writ, take protective measures over assets identified in France: bank accounts, shares, receivables from customers, real estate, vessels. Article L. 511-1 of the Code of civil enforcement procedures allows any person whose claim appears well founded in principle to obtain leave from the enforcement judge for a conservatory attachment or a judicial security, where circumstances threaten recovery. A foreign judgment, even one not yet enforceable in France, establishes the appearance of the claim without difficulty; the threat to recovery follows from the circumstances, notably the debtor’s conduct during the foreign trial and the location of his assets.
The measure must then be followed, within one month, by proceedings for an enforceable title, and the exequatur writ satisfies that requirement. Once exequatur is granted, the conservatory attachment converts into an attachment of debts or a sale attachment without fresh proceedings. Timing is everything here: the application is generally heard within six to eight months where it is not seriously contested, and twelve to eighteen months where service or public policy is in issue, with an appeal still possible. That delay is precisely why the assets must be tied up at the outset.
After exequatur: enforcement itself
The exequatur judgment gives the foreign decision enforceable force in France. The creditor then serves the judgment and proceeds, through a judicial officer, to the ordinary enforcement measures: attachment of bank accounts and receivables, attachment of company shares and securities, attachment of real estate, arrest of a vessel or aircraft. Interest runs at the rate fixed by the foreign judgment, or failing that at the legal rate of the country of origin, until payment, and conversion into euros is made at the date of payment. The costs of the exequatur proceedings are in principle borne by the debtor.
A foreign creditor usually gains by entrusting the whole sequence, asset tracing, protective measures, exequatur and enforcement, to a single French lawyer working alongside his counsel in the country of origin. The firm acts in that role, in English, beginning with an assessment of the prospects, of the assets that can be identified and of the likely timetable.
The special case of arbitral awards
If what has to be enforced is an arbitral award rather than a judgment, the regime is different and more favourable. Article 1514 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that arbitral awards are recognised or enforced in France if their existence is established by the party relying on them and if such recognition or enforcement is not manifestly contrary to international public policy. Exequatur is obtained by order of the tribunal judiciaire of Paris on an ex parte application, within weeks, and an appeal against the order is not suspensive.
The New York Convention of 1958 also applies, but its article VII allows the creditor to rely on French law where it is more favourable, which it is. A creditor holding both a judgment and an award should therefore check which instrument gives the faster route into French assets before choosing.
Do you hold a foreign judgment against a debtor with assets in France? The first decision is whether to take protective measures, before the debtor learns of the application. An initial discussion assesses the title and the assets.
Frequently asked questions
Is a United States judgment directly enforceable in France?
No. No convention binds France and the United States in this field. The judgment must be declared enforceable by the tribunal judiciaire through exequatur proceedings, which check the jurisdiction of the US court, conformity with international public policy and the absence of fraud (Cass. 1re civ., 20 February 2007, Cornelissen, no. 05-14.082).
What about an English judgment after Brexit?
For proceedings begun in the United Kingdom after 1 July 2025, the 2019 Hague Convention applies between France and the United Kingdom, with limited grounds of refusal. For earlier proceedings, French common law applies, save where an exclusive choice of court agreement brings the 2005 Hague Convention into play.
Can US punitive damages be enforced in France?
In principle yes, since they are not in themselves contrary to international public policy (Cass. 1re civ., 1 December 2010, no. 09-13.303), but exequatur is refused where the amount is disproportionate to the loss. Seeking partial exequatur, limited to the compensatory part, avoids that risk.
How long do exequatur proceedings take?
Six to eight months where there is no serious contest, twelve to eighteen months where service or public policy is disputed, appeal not included. For an arbitral award a few weeks suffice, the order being made on an ex parte application.
Can the debtor’s assets be secured before the proceedings end?
Yes, by a conservatory attachment or judicial security authorised by the enforcement judge under article L. 511-1 of the Code of civil enforcement procedures, the foreign judgment establishing the appearance of the claim. The exequatur writ must then be issued within one month.
On the same subject, for a country without any treaty with France but with two legal traditions: enforcing a Canadian or Quebec judgment in France.
Further reading: enforcing a foreign judgment in France, international arbitration, arresting a ship to secure a claim.
Written by Hervé Guyader, avocat at the Paris Bar, doctor of law. This content is general information and is no substitute for advice on your own matter.