Until this date, five different class actions regimes applied to consumer protection, antitrust, public health, discrimination, data protection, and environmental law.
Each of these regimes had its own specificities regarding the entities entitled to bring a class action, the compensable damages, and the breaches that could be alleged against the defendant. Since the introduction of class actions in France ten years ago, nearly 40 class actions have been brought, and two have resulted in first instance judgments on liability.
After a few abandoned proposals, the government submitted a draft bill in October 2024 transposing several European directives, including Directive 2020/1828 on representative actions. Under the April 30, 2025 Act, class actions are now harmonized within a single regime featuring several new measures, such as civil fines, which may raise certain difficulties.
This reform brings several changes and simplifications that could lead to an increase of class actions brought before French courts, although other EU member states still have much more liberal regimes.
A unified class action regime
The April 30, 2025 Act harmonizes the scope of class actions. In lieu of the five regimes introduced since 2014, the new act establishes common rules for all class actions, allowing the claimant to seek an injunction against any infringement by the professional (injunction class action) and/or compensation for all damages suffered by consumers in a similar situation (compensation class action).
Thus, any infringement by a professional of legal or contractual obligations may give rise to a class action, except in public health matters, where class action will only be possible in the event of a breach by a producer or supplier of health products.
Specialized judicial courts will have jurisdiction over class actions and will have the power to dismiss manifestly unfounded actions at the outset of the proceedings.
Legal standing extended to a wider range of claimants
Under the April 30, 2025 Act, class actions remain the prerogative of approved associations, which may, however, be far more numerous than, for instance, the 14 associations currently approved to bring class actions in consumer protection matters.
This reform sets out new conditions of independence and transparency for an association to apply for approval to bring class actions. These conditions are defined pursuant to the criteria set out by Article 4 of Directive 2020/1828 relating to “qualified entities” that can bring representative actions on behalf of consumers.
Class actions are also available, under more restrictive conditions, to non-profit associations that are duly registered but not approved, representative unions and the public prosecutor:
- Non-profit associations that have been duly registered but not approved, which can demonstrate 24 months of effective and public activity and whose statutory purpose includes the defense of interests that have been infringed, can bring injunction class actions (but cannot bring compensation class action, which may limit the interest of this new provision).
- In line with the previous regimes, representative unions can bring class actions related to discrimination and for the protection of personal data.
- The public prosecutor may also bring, as principal party, injunction class action or intervene in an on-going injunction or compensation class action.
It is also provided that “qualified entities” from other member states of the European Union, as defined by Directive 2020/1828, can bring class actions in France.
Claimants will be required to inform the public of the class actions they initiated. A public register of ongoing class actions will be handled and published by the French Ministry of Justice.
Class actions claimants must not be in a situation of conflict of interests, and the judge may, if necessary, order them to produce documents justifying the absence of conflict of interests. Third-party litigation funding will be permitted, but regulated by decree, it being specified that the third party shall have no influence over the initiation or conduct of class actions.
New provisions with some uncertainties
Class actions may now be brought on behalf of legal entities, allowing so-called “B to B” class actions. This change could make class actions much more attractive than they have been in the past, particularly for antitrust or securities and financial litigation.
This innovation nevertheless raises concerns insofar as it constitutes an "over-implementation" of Directive 2020/1828. One may then wonder whether French "qualified entities" will be able to bring cross-border class actions for the benefit of legal entities located in other member states of the European Union.
Another major new feature of the April 30, 2025 Act is the introduction of a civil fine at article 1254 of the French Civil Code. This fine, applicable in proceedings where the event giving rise to liability occurs on or after May 2, 2025, is subject to the following requirements:
- The author of the damage must have committed a deliberate wrongdoing to obtain an undue profit or saving.
- The infringement must have caused one or more damages to several natural or legal persons placed in a similar situation.
- The conditions are strictly defined: the fine is ordered in a specially reasoned decision from the judge and solely upon the request of the public prosecutor or the government.
Furthermore, the amount of the fine will be proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and is capped at twice the profit for natural persons and five times the profit for legal persons. The proceeds will be allocated to a public fund dedicated to financing class actions.
It should be noted that article 1254 of the French Civil Code does not appear to be limited to class actions. This fine could therefore also be applicable to other civil proceedings if the conditions are met (i.e., a deliberate wrongdoing committed with the intention of obtaining a gain or saving and causing damage to several natural or legal persons placed in a similar situation).
Finally, the April 30, 2025 Act suffers from some drafting inaccuracies—for example, whereas for injunction class actions, it is specified that “publicity measures can only be implemented once the order is no longer subject to appeal,” such a provision is not included for compensation class actions.
In practice, this discrepancy could allow publicity measures to be sought following the first instance decision on liability in a compensation class action, even if the defendant appeals the decision. Given the uncertainties generated by such a solution, it would be appropriate for Parliament to correct this difference between the regimes applicable to injunction class actions and compensation class actions. In the meantime, defendants should request the first instance court to set aside the provisional enforcement of decision on liability or ask the court of appeal to suspend the provisional enforcement of the decision under appeal.
These are all questions that will have to be answered by the specialized courts in charge of future class actions.
