Droit de la Famille

Revocation of the closing order: the Cour de cassation rules on Articles 16, 783 and 784 of the new French Code of Civil Procedure

📅 Décision du 03 April 1997⚖️ Cour de cassation

The Court of Appeal violates Article 16 of the new Code of Civil Procedure, together with Articles 783 and 784 of that Code, where, in order to revoke the closing order (ordonnance de clôture) and to postpone that closure to the date of the opening of the oral hearing, it holds that certain defendants had sought the revocation so as to adduce documents whose disclosure the claimant had requested only on the day of that closure; that, at the oral hearing, the claimant's representative, in the latter's presence, had raised no objection to the revocation sought; and that, in view of that agreement, it was appropriate to revoke the closing order and to postpone that closure to the date of the opening of the hearing; whereas, when the judge revokes the closing order, that decision, which must be founded on a serious cause, must be made before the closure of the hearing or, failing that, be accompanied by a reopening of the latter.

Reference decision: Court of Cassation • No. 93-10.301 • 3 April 1997 • View the decision →

This decision provides important insight into your family and estate rights. Here is what it changes for you.

The situation

The Court of Appeal violates Article 16 of the new Code of Civil Procedure, together with Articles 783 and 784 of that Code, where, in order to revoke the closing order (ordonnance de clôture) and to postpone that closure to the date of the opening of the oral hearing, it holds that certain defendants had sought the revocation so as to adduce documents whose disclosure the claimant had requested only on the day of that closure; that, at the oral hearing, the claimant's representative, in the latter's presence, had raised no objection to the revocation sought; and that, in view of that agreement, it was appropriate to revoke the closing order and to postpone that closure to the date of the opening of the hearing; whereas, when the judge revokes the closing order, that decision, which must be founded on a serious cause, must be made before the closure of the hearing or, failing that, be accompanied by a reopening of the latter.

What the law says

This decision reaffirms the fundamental principles of property law.

Key points to remember

  • Comply scrupulously with the statutory time limits for appeals
  • Keep all your supporting documents (title deeds, legal instruments, correspondence)
  • Plan ahead: preventive advice is always less costly than litigation

For an analysis of your situation: 30-minute consultation for €70 with Maître Perucca.

⚖️ Does this apply to you?

Maître Bruno Perucca, French family & estate lawyer, Antibes — available across France (FR/EN/IT).

📞 +33 6 89 73 10 87  |  ⭐ 4.9/5 (304 reviews)

Book 30 min — €70   → Learn more

Informations juridiques

  • Numéro: 93-10.301
  • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
  • Date de décision: 03 avril 1997

Mots-clés

droit de la famillejurisprudencefamille
BP

À propos de l'auteur

Maître Bruno Perucca — Avocat au Barreau de Grasse, Docteur en Droit, spécialisé en droit de la famille et du patrimoine. Chaque article de ce magazine est rédigé à partir de l'analyse d'une décision de jurisprudence réelle, commentée et mise en perspective par Maître Bruno Perucca.

Avertissement: Les analyses présentées sur ce site sont fournies à titre informatif uniquement et ne constituent pas des conseils juridiques personnalisés. Pour une consultation adaptée à votre situation, contactez un avocat.

★★★★★4.9/5 — Avis Google

Maître Bruno Perucca, Doctor of Law

Phone and video consultations available — Fast appointments

Book an appointment
First consultation 30 minutes — €45

🔒 Confidentiel • Sans engagement • Réponse sous 24h

Continuer votre lecture

L'obligation de délivrance d'un