An arbitral award is not an enforceable title in France until it has been granted exequatur. The application is made by ex parte petition, to the tribunal judiciaire of Paris where the award was made abroad, and the judge checks only two things: that the existence of the award is established by the party relying on it, and that enforcement is not manifestly contrary to international public policy. The debtor is not heard at that stage, and the challenge he brings afterwards does not suspend enforcement.
A French company succeeds in an arbitration seated in Geneva. The award orders its counterparty to pay four million euros. The debtor is established outside Europe, but holds shares in a French company and an account with a Paris bank. The award by itself allows neither to be attached: it is not a French judgment. It must first be clothed with exequatur, and that must happen before the assets move.
What the exequatur judge actually checks
Article 1514 of the Code of Civil Procedure is deceptively brief: arbitral awards are recognised or enforced in France if their existence is established by the party relying on them and if that recognition or enforcement is not manifestly contrary to international public policy. Two conditions, and no more. The judge does not retry the dispute, does not review the arbitrators’ reasoning, and does not verify that the law was correctly applied to the merits.
The adverb matters as much as the rest. The conflict must be manifest, that is apparent on reading, without investigation. Full review of international public policy comes only at the challenge stage, before the court of appeal, and it can then be searching: the Cour de cassation upheld the annulment of an award whose enforcement would have allowed a party to benefit from the proceeds of criminal activity, holding that the court of appeal was bound neither by the arbitrators’ findings nor by their characterisations (Cass. 1re civ., 23 March 2022, no. 17-17.981).
Which court, and why nobody is summoned
Article 1516 of the Code of Civil Procedure distinguishes according to where the award was made. If it was made in France, the petition goes to the tribunal judiciaire in whose district it was rendered. If it was made abroad, jurisdiction is concentrated on the tribunal judiciaire of Paris. That concentration is a practical advantage: the registry handles these petitions in numbers and knows the field.
The same article adds that the procedure is not adversarial. The petition is filed by the most diligent party, the judge decides on the papers, and the debtor learns of the order only when it is served on him, or when an attachment bites. That absence of debate explains two things: the speed of the exequatur stage, and the fact that the whole contest moves downstream, onto the challenge.
The documents to produce, and what changes on 1 January 2027
Article 1515 currently requires production of the original award together with the arbitration agreement, or copies of those documents satisfying the conditions required for their authenticity. A translation may be required, made by a translator on a list of court experts or authorised before the authorities of another Member State of the European Union, of a State party to the European Economic Area agreement, or of Switzerland. Exequatur is affixed to the original or, failing that, to the certified copy, and also to the translation (article 1517).
Decree no. 2026-741 of 6 August 2026 amends this, but the calendar must be stated precisely, because it is already being misread: it enters into force only on 1 January 2027, and its provisions on exequatur apply only to awards made after that date. The criterion is not the date of the petition but the date of the award. An award made in 2026 stays under the present regime even if exequatur is sought in 2028. In due course the requirement of an original disappears in favour of a simple counterpart, which finally aligns the text with the practice of electronically signed awards.
The five grounds of article 1520, and nothing else
When the court of appeal is seised, it has only five grounds, exhaustively listed by article 1520 of the Code of Civil Procedure: the arbitral tribunal wrongly accepted or declined jurisdiction; it was irregularly constituted; it ruled without complying with the mission conferred on it; the adversarial principle was not respected; or recognition or enforcement is contrary to international public policy.
Those five grounds are also the only grounds for refusing exequatur of an award made abroad, article 1525 providing that the court of appeal may refuse recognition or enforcement only in the cases set out in article 1520. In other words, an argument that the arbitrators erred in law, assessed the evidence badly or awarded too much will not be heard. The challenges that fail are almost always those which try to have the merits retried under cover of the fourth or fifth ground.
Challenges and time limits, which do not run from the same act
Three situations must be distinguished. An international award made in France can be attacked only by an action to set aside, brought before the Paris Court of Appeal; it is admissible as soon as the award is made and ceases to be so one month after notification of the award (articles 1518 and 1519). An order refusing exequatur of such an award may be appealed within one month of service (article 1523), while an order granting it is in principle not open to appeal, the action to set aside absorbing it (article 1524). Finally, a decision ruling on an award made abroad, whether it grants or refuses, may be appealed within one month of service (article 1525).
Two traps recur. The first is the starting point, which is notification for the action to set aside and service for the appeals: these are not the same acts, and the gap is paid for in inadmissibility. The second is the distance extension of article 643 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which adds two months for parties resident abroad but whose wording covers appeals and not the action to set aside. For a party domiciled outside France, that point must be settled document in hand before a single line of the notice is drafted.
The Paris Court of Appeal’s exclusive jurisdiction since 2025
Article L. 311-16-1 of the Code of judicial organisation, created by Law no. 2024-537 of 13 June 2024 and in force since 1 June 2025, gives the Paris Court of Appeal national jurisdiction over actions to set aside awards made in international arbitration and over challenges to decisions ruling on recognition or exequatur of such awards. Those challenges are heard by the court’s international commercial chamber.
The rule applies only to challenges brought after its entry into force. It is today the reform that actually bites, far more than the 2026 decree that attracts more comment, and it carries a concrete consequence: a challenge brought before any other court of appeal is doomed procedurally, with the loss of time that implies when the one-month period is already running.
Why French law usually prevails over the New York Convention
The New York Convention of 10 June 1958 lists seven grounds of refusal in its article V, including annulment of the award in its country of origin. Its article VII, however, preserves the right of any interested party to avail itself of an award in the manner and to the extent allowed by the law of the country where it is relied upon. Since French law knows only one ground at the exequatur stage, and article 1520 ignores annulment at the seat, it is almost always French law that applies, the Convention being set aside because it is less favourable.
The Cour de cassation put it in the strongest terms, holding that an international award, not being attached to any State legal order, is a decision of international justice whose regularity is examined under the rules of the country where enforcement is sought (Cass. 1re civ., 29 June 2007, no. 05-18.053). An award annulled at its seat can therefore be enforced in France. That is a decisive argument in choosing where to enforce, and it is one to be weighed before the petition is filed, not after.
What the firm does
Work begins with an audit of the award and of the arbitration agreement: the form of the documents, the authenticity of copies, whether and how far a translation is needed, and the identification and location of attachable assets. That stage governs everything else, because a petition filed with an incomplete file loses the weeks during which the debtor organises his insolvency. The firm then prepares and files the petition and moves straight to enforcement once the order is obtained.
The firm also acts in defence, for a debtor who discovers an exequatur order or an attachment: characterising the available challenge, calculating the period and its exact starting point, assessing the prospects under the five grounds of article 1520, and applying to stay or adapt enforcement before the first president where the conditions of article 1526 are met. On either side the first question is always the same: how many days are left.
Do you hold an arbitral award to enforce in France, or have you just been served with an exequatur order? The firm checks the documents, calculates the deadlines and files without delay.
Frequently asked questions
How long does it take to obtain exequatur of an arbitral award?
Since the procedure is not adversarial, the order is obtained within a few weeks where the petition is complete on filing. What lengthens matters is almost never the registry but the file: a missing original, an arbitration agreement not produced, a translation that does not meet the requirements of article 1515 of the Code of Civil Procedure. An appeal, by contrast, is counted in months.
Can the debtor object before the order is made?
No. Article 1516 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the exequatur procedure is not adversarial. The debtor is neither summoned nor heard. It is the counterpart of that rule which opens to him, depending on the case, the appeal of article 1525 or the action to set aside, once the order has been made.
Can an award annulled at its seat be enforced in France?
Yes, and that is a French particularity. Article 1520 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not list annulment at the seat among the grounds of refusal, whereas article V of the New York Convention does. Through article VII of that Convention, a party may rely on the more favourable French law (Cass. 1re civ., 29 June 2007, no. 05-18.053).
Must the award be translated?
The judge may require it. Article 1515 provides that the party may be invited to produce a translation made by a translator on a list of court experts, or authorised before the authorities of another Member State of the European Union, of an EEA State or of Switzerland. Exequatur is then affixed to the translation as well.
Does a challenge suspend enforcement of the award?
No. Article 1526 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that neither the action to set aside nor the appeal against the exequatur order is suspensive. The first president sitting in summary proceedings, or the pre-trial judge once seised, may only stay or adapt enforcement where it is liable seriously to prejudice the rights of a party.
Further reading: exequatur and enforcement of foreign decisions, international arbitration, enforcing a US or English judgment in France.
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.