To enforce a France court judgment in Belgium, a creditor must rely on EU Regulation 1215/2012 (Brussels I Recast), which allows direct enforcement of most civil and commercial judgments across EU member states without a prior declaration of enforceability. France and Belgium are both EU members, which means the procedural path is well-defined, relatively fast, and significantly cheaper than enforcement in non-EU jurisdictions. This guide explains the full process - from verifying that your judgment qualifies, through serving the debtor and instructing a Belgian bailiff, to anticipating debtor defences and managing costs.
Not every French court decision travels automatically. The first step is confirming that the judgment falls within the material scope of Brussels I Recast. The Regulation covers civil and commercial matters broadly, including contract disputes, tort claims, and debt recovery. It excludes insolvency proceedings, family law, maintenance obligations governed by separate EU rules, arbitration, and certain administrative matters.
The judgment must also be enforceable in France itself. A judgment that is still subject to appeal, or that has been stayed by a French court, cannot be enforced in Belgium in the meantime. Creditors should obtain a certified copy of the judgment and, crucially, a Certificate under Article 53 of Brussels I Recast. This certificate is issued by the French court that rendered the decision and confirms the judgment's enforceability status, the parties, the amount awarded, and any interest accruing.
A common mistake is treating the Article 53 certificate as a formality that can be obtained at any time. In practice, French courts vary in how quickly they issue it - some jurisdictions process requests within two to three weeks, others take six to eight weeks. Requesting the certificate immediately after the judgment becomes enforceable saves significant time downstream.
The judgment must also not conflict with a Belgian judgment on the same matter between the same parties, and it must not have been preceded by an irreconcilable judgment from a third country that was recognised in Belgium first. These conflicts are rare in commercial practice but worth checking before investing in enforcement.
Under Brussels I Recast, a French judgment that carries the Article 53 certificate is treated in Belgium as if it were a Belgian judgment. There is no separate exequatur procedure - the old requirement to obtain a Belgian court's declaration of enforceability was abolished for judgments falling under the Regulation. This is the most important practical change compared to the pre-2015 regime.
In practice, the creditor instructs a Belgian huissier de justice (bailiff) directly. The bailiff serves the judgment and the Article 53 certificate on the debtor. Belgian law requires that the debtor receive prior notice before enforcement measures are taken. This notice period is typically one month, though it can be shortened in urgent cases by applying to the Belgian enforcement court (the juge des saisies).
The bailiff then proceeds with enforcement measures available under Belgian law. These include seizure of bank accounts, attachment of movable assets, seizure of real property, and garnishment of receivables owed to the debtor by third parties. Belgian enforcement law is governed primarily by the Belgian Judicial Code, Part V, which sets out the procedural rules for each type of measure.
One non-obvious requirement is that the documents served on the debtor must be in a language the debtor understands, or accompanied by a translation. If the debtor is a Belgian entity whose working language is French, a French-language judgment usually suffices. If the debtor operates in Dutch or German, a certified translation of the judgment and certificate into the relevant language is required. Failing to provide a proper translation is one of the most common grounds on which debtors challenge enforcement in Belgium.
Scenario one - a French supplier enforcing a contract debt against a Belgian distributor. A French company has obtained a judgment from the Tribunal de commerce de Paris for unpaid invoices totalling EUR 180,000 plus interest. The Belgian distributor has assets in Belgium, including a bank account and commercial real estate. The French company obtains the Article 53 certificate within three weeks, instructs a Belgian bailiff, and serves the judgment. The debtor does not challenge enforcement. The bailiff seizes the bank account within two weeks of service and transfers the funds, less bailiff fees, to the creditor within a further four to six weeks. Total elapsed time from instruction to recovery: approximately three months.
Scenario two - a French individual enforcing a damages award against a Belgian company that has raised a public policy objection. A French individual holds a judgment from the Cour d'appel de Lyon for EUR 95,000 in damages. The Belgian company argues that enforcement would be contrary to Belgian public policy (ordre public) because the French court allegedly failed to give it adequate opportunity to present its case. The company applies to the Belgian court of first instance to refuse or suspend enforcement under Article 46 of Brussels I Recast. The Belgian court examines the procedural record. If it finds the objection unsubstantiated - which is the outcome in the majority of cases - enforcement proceeds. If it grants a stay, the creditor may need to wait several additional months while the challenge is resolved. This scenario underlines why creditors should ensure that French proceedings were conducted with proper notice to the Belgian defendant.
If you are navigating a contested enforcement or a multi-asset situation, contact info@vlolawfirm.com. We can help structure the setup correctly the first time.
Brussels I Recast limits the grounds on which a Belgian court can refuse or suspend enforcement of a French judgment. The list is exhaustive and set out in Articles 45 and 46 of the Regulation. Understanding these grounds helps creditors anticipate challenges and structure their enforcement strategy accordingly.
The main grounds for refusal are:
The public policy ground is the most frequently invoked but rarely succeeds. Belgian courts interpret it narrowly, consistent with the Court of Justice of the EU's case law, which holds that mere errors of law or fact by the French court are not sufficient. The ground is reserved for fundamental violations - for example, a judgment obtained through fraud on the court, or proceedings in which the defendant had no meaningful opportunity to be heard.
The default judgment ground is more practically significant. If the French proceedings were served by publication or by a method that did not give the Belgian defendant actual notice, a Belgian court may refuse enforcement. Creditors who obtained default judgments in France should review the service record carefully before proceeding to Belgium.
A non-obvious risk is the interaction between enforcement and Belgian insolvency proceedings. If the Belgian debtor is subject to a procedure de réorganisation judiciaire (judicial reorganisation) or has been declared bankrupt, enforcement measures may be automatically stayed under Belgian insolvency law, regardless of the Brussels I Recast framework. Checking the Belgian Crossroads Bank for Enterprises and the relevant court registers before instructing a bailiff is a practical precaution.
Enforcement costs in Belgium consist of several layers. Belgian bailiff fees are regulated by royal decree and are calculated on a scale linked to the amount recovered. For a judgment of moderate size - say, EUR 50,000 to EUR 200,000 - bailiff fees for the service and enforcement steps typically fall in the low to mid thousands of euros. For larger amounts, the fee scales upward but is capped at certain thresholds.
Translation costs add to the budget if the judgment must be rendered in Dutch or German. A certified legal translation of a commercial judgment and its accompanying certificate typically costs several hundred to low thousands of euros depending on length and complexity.
Legal fees for instructing a Belgian avocat to supervise the enforcement, advise on asset tracing, and respond to any debtor challenge vary considerably. For straightforward enforcement without opposition, fees are generally in the low thousands of euros. Contested enforcement - where the debtor applies to a Belgian court under Article 46 - can extend the process by three to six months and add materially to legal costs on both sides.
State fees for any court application in Belgium are modest by comparison. Applications to the juge des saisies for urgent measures or to contest a debtor's challenge involve court filing fees that are generally in the hundreds of euros range.
In terms of timeline, uncontested enforcement of a French judgment in Belgium typically takes two to four months from the date the creditor instructs a Belgian bailiff to the date funds are transferred. Contested enforcement, where the debtor raises Article 46 grounds, typically adds three to six months. Asset tracing, if the debtor's assets are not immediately identifiable, can extend the process further.
Many creditors underestimate the importance of pre-enforcement asset tracing. A judgment is only as valuable as the assets available to satisfy it. Belgian bailiffs have access to certain databases - including the Central Individual Credit Register and, in some cases, tax authority records - but their access is not unlimited. Engaging a specialist to identify Belgian bank accounts, real property, and receivables before serving the judgment can significantly improve recovery rates.
What happens if the French judgment is still under appeal when I want to enforce it in Belgium?
A French judgment that is subject to an ordinary appeal (appel) is generally not enforceable unless the French court has granted provisional enforcement (exécution provisoire). If provisional enforcement has been ordered, the judgment can be enforced in Belgium, but the Belgian court can require the creditor to provide security. If the French judgment is subsequently overturned on appeal, the creditor must return what was recovered. Creditors should therefore confirm the enforcement status of the judgment in France before proceeding, and consider whether to wait for the appeal period to expire or to proceed under provisional enforcement with appropriate risk management.
How long does it realistically take to recover funds from a Belgian debtor under a French judgment?
For an uncontested case where the debtor has identifiable liquid assets - typically a bank account - the realistic timeline from instructing a Belgian bailiff to receiving funds is two to four months. This includes the mandatory notice period before enforcement, the seizure process, and the transfer of funds. If the debtor challenges enforcement under Article 46 of Brussels I Recast, add three to six months for the Belgian court proceedings. If the debtor's assets are primarily real property, enforcement through judicial sale takes considerably longer - often six to twelve months or more - because Belgian law requires a formal auction process for immovable assets.
Can I enforce a French judgment in Belgium if the debtor has no assets there but has a Belgian subsidiary?
A French judgment against a parent company cannot be enforced directly against a Belgian subsidiary, because the subsidiary is a separate legal entity. Enforcement must be against the named judgment debtor's own assets in Belgium. However, if the judgment debtor holds shares in the Belgian subsidiary, those shares can in principle be seized and sold. Alternatively, if the Belgian subsidiary owes money to the judgment debtor - for example, through intercompany loans or unpaid dividends - those receivables can be garnished. In complex group structures, it is worth mapping the debtor's Belgian assets carefully before deciding on the enforcement strategy.
Enforcing a French court judgment in Belgium is a structured, EU-regulated process that, when handled correctly, can yield results within a few months. The Brussels I Recast framework removes the old exequatur barrier and gives creditors a direct route to Belgian enforcement measures. Success depends on obtaining the Article 53 certificate promptly, ensuring proper service, anticipating debtor defences, and identifying assets before enforcement begins.
VLO Law Firm advises international clients on judgment enforcement matters involving France and Belgium. We can assist with obtaining the Article 53 certificate, instructing Belgian bailiffs, conducting asset tracing, and responding to debtor challenges under Brussels I Recast. To request a consultation, contact: info@vlolawfirm.com