What is private international law in France? French private international law explained

Private international law in France determines which court may hear a cross-border dispute, which law governs it, and whether a decision made abroad can take effect in France. Those questions arise whenever a family relationship, contract, succession or filiation claim connects France with another country. Among cross-border family cases, the same rules govern jurisdiction, applicable law and recognition, but their operation is shaped by the instruments specific to family matters.

How French private international law works

French PIL is not a single area of substantive law. It is the body of rules used by a French court when a private legal situation has an international element. The court must identify the competent jurisdiction, determine the applicable law, and decide whether a foreign judgment should be recognised or enforced.

The meaning and scope of private international law in France

The distinction matters: public international law governs relations between states, whereas French private international law addresses conflicts between legal systems in private disputes.

• Jurisdiction determines which country's courts may hear the dispute. French courts require a recognised connecting factor; they do not acquire jurisdiction merely because one party is French.

• Choice of law identifies the national law governing the substance of the dispute. A French court may therefore have jurisdiction while applying foreign law.

• Recognition of foreign judgments determines whether a decision made abroad produces legal effects in France. The answer depends on the judgment's origin and on the applicable instrument.

These questions are separate and usually examined in that order. A parent who obtains a custody order abroad cannot assume that a French court will enforce it automatically. The position differs between EU Member States, where EU regulations provide mechanisms for the circulation of decisions, and third countries, where a bilateral convention or exequatur may be required.

The sources of French private international law

France has no single enacted code of private international law. The rule governing a dispute may instead come from case law, the Civil Code, EU regulations, Hague Conventions or bilateral treaties. France is bound by numerous conventions adopted under the Hague Conference on private international law and is party to further multilateral instruments.

Different instruments apply to different subjects. For divorce and legal separation, the Rome III Regulation applies; for maintenance, the Hague Protocol of 23 November 2007, as incorporated by Regulation 4/2009, is relevant; and for matrimonial property regimes, EU Regulation 2016/1103 governs designations made after 29 January 2019. EU regulations take precedence over domestic French law within their field, while Hague Conventions apply where the relevant EU instrument does not reach. The European e-Justice Portal sets out the French private international law rules and their practical operation.

Jurisdiction and applicable law

French courts must first decide whether they have jurisdiction. The connecting factor depends on the subject: in parental-responsibility proceedings, the child's habitual residence is central; in divorce proceedings, the spouses'habitual residence when the proceedings are filed is the primary anchor. Nationality alone does not confer jurisdiction on French courts. Without a recognised connection, the court may declare that it lacks jurisdiction rather than examine the merits.

The applicable law is identified through conflict of laws rules contained in the relevant instrument. A French court applying the Rome III Regulation will typically designate the law of the couple's habitual residence on the date of the divorce petition. That law may be foreign law, requiring the judge to establish its content with the assistance of the parties and, where necessary, through independent research.

In practice, the first point of vigilance is to identify the instrument governing jurisdiction before arguing which substantive law should apply.

Subject matter	Governing instrument	Primary connecting factor
Parental responsibility	Brussels II ter	Child's habitual residence
Divorce / legal separation	Rome III Regulation	Spouses'habitual residence at filing
Matrimonial property	EU Regulation 2016/1103	First common habitual residence after marriage
Maintenance obligations	Hague Protocol / Regulation 4/2009	Creditor's habitual residence
Filiation	Civil Code, Art. 311-14	Mother's personal law at child's birth
Contractual obligations	Rome I Regulation	Party autonomy; closest connection failing choice

Recognition of foreign judgments

Within the EU, Brussels II ter provides for the automatic recognition of parental-responsibility decisions, so a separate exequatur procedure is generally unnecessary between Member States. The mechanism also applies to judgments in matrimonial matters and parental responsibility issued by courts of EU Member States, subject to limited grounds of refusal.

Where the originating state is outside the EU, the position changes. Recognition may depend on a bilateral convention or on exequatur, during which a French court examines whether the foreign court had genuine jurisdiction and whether the decision is compatible with French public policy.

A draft code of private international law was submitted to the Ministry of Justice on 31 March 2022. It contains 207 articles arranged in six books covering general rules, special rules, procedure, the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, provisional measures and transitional provisions.

The project followed three years of drafting commissioned by the Keeper of the Seals. The drafters'stated objective was to improve accessibility and readability by consolidating into legislation matters that French PIL has historically left to case law. The draft code has not been enacted, but it indicates a possible direction for reform within the French legal system.

The present legal application must nevertheless be based on the instruments already in force, not on the draft. What matters in a live case is the governing legislation, the applicable law, and the procedural route available before the relevant court.