Enforcing a Ukraine Court Judgment in France

Enforcing a Ukraine court judgment in France is possible but requires a formal recognition procedure before French courts. France does not automatically execute foreign judgments; a creditor must obtain an exequatur - a court order declaring the foreign judgment enforceable on French territory. The process is governed by French private international law, primarily the principles codified in the French Code of Civil Procedure and developed through decades of case law. This guide explains the legal framework, the step-by-step procedure, realistic timelines, cost levels, common defences raised by debtors, and practical strategies for creditors seeking to recover assets in France.

Exequatur is the French legal mechanism by which a foreign court judgment is recognised and declared enforceable in France. Because Ukraine and France have not concluded a bilateral treaty on mutual recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments, there is no simplified or automatic route. Each Ukrainian judgment must go through the standard exequatur procedure before the Tribunal judiciaire - the court of general jurisdiction in France.

The absence of a bilateral treaty does not make enforcement impossible. French courts regularly grant exequatur to judgments from non-treaty countries, including Ukraine, provided the judgment meets the conditions established by French case law, most notably the landmark Munzer and Bachir decisions of the Cour de cassation. Those conditions are not a re-examination of the merits; they are a formal review of the judgment's regularity.

A creditor holding a Ukrainian judgment should understand from the outset that French courts will not reconsider whether the Ukrainian court was right on the facts or the law. The review is limited to procedural and public-policy grounds. This distinction is critical: it means a well-documented Ukrainian judgment with a clear operative part stands a strong chance of recognition.

French private international law on foreign judgment recognition rests on judge-made law rather than a single statute. The Cour de cassation has developed a stable set of conditions over several decades, and lower courts apply them consistently.

The five classic Munzer conditions require that:

• the foreign court had international jurisdiction under French conflict-of-laws rules
• the foreign procedure respected the rights of the defence (due process)
• the foreign law applied was the law designated by French choice-of-law rules, or the deviation was justified
• the judgment is not contrary to French international public policy (ordre public international)
• the judgment is free from fraud

In practice, French courts have relaxed the third condition - the conflict-of-laws review - significantly since the Cornelissen decision of the Cour de cassation. Today, French judges focus primarily on jurisdiction, due process, public policy, and the absence of fraud. A Ukrainian judgment rendered by a competent court following proper adversarial procedure will generally satisfy these conditions.

The relevant French procedural rules are found in Articles 509 and following of the Code of Civil Procedure, which govern the enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards. The Tribunal judiciaire of the place where enforcement is sought, or where the debtor is domiciled, has territorial jurisdiction.

The exequatur process begins with preparing a complete application file. The applicant - the judgment creditor - files a petition (requête) with the Tribunal judiciaire. The petition is not contested at the initial stage; it is an ex parte application reviewed by a single judge.

The application file must include a certified copy of the Ukrainian judgment, a certified French translation of the judgment, proof that the judgment is final and enforceable in Ukraine, and a certificate of service showing the defendant was properly notified in the original Ukrainian proceedings. Ukrainian court documents are typically apostilled under the Hague Apostille Convention, to which both Ukraine and France are parties, which simplifies authentication.

Once the file is lodged, the judge reviews it on the papers. If the conditions are met, the judge issues an ordonnance d'exequatur, usually within a few weeks. This order is then served on the debtor by a French huissier de justice (bailiff). The debtor has one month from service to appeal the exequatur order before the Cour d'appel. If no appeal is filed, the exequatur becomes final and the creditor may proceed to enforcement.

If the debtor appeals, the case moves to a full adversarial hearing before the Cour d'appel. Both parties submit written arguments and the court issues a judgment, typically within six to eighteen months depending on the court's workload. A further appeal on points of law to the Cour de cassation is possible but rarely changes the outcome on well-established grounds.

Once exequatur is final, the creditor uses standard French enforcement mechanisms: seizure of bank accounts (saisie-attribution), seizure of movable assets, or registration of a judicial mortgage over real property. These steps are carried out by a huissier de justice acting under the exequatur order.

The timeline to enforce a Ukraine judgment in France depends heavily on whether the debtor contests the exequatur. In an uncontested case, the initial exequatur order can be obtained within four to eight weeks of filing a complete application. If the debtor does not appeal within the one-month period, the creditor can begin enforcement within approximately two to three months of filing.

A contested case is significantly longer. An appeal before the Cour d'appel typically takes between eight and twenty months, depending on the jurisdiction and complexity. If the debtor pursues a further cassation appeal, the total timeline can extend to three years or more. Creditors should plan for this possibility and consider interim protective measures - such as a saisie conservatoire (precautionary seizure) - to freeze assets while the exequatur is being litigated.

On costs, the exequatur procedure involves several layers of expense. Court filing fees in France are modest by international standards. The main costs are professional fees: a French avocat (lawyer) admitted to the relevant Tribunal judiciaire is required to represent the creditor, and fees for exequatur proceedings typically start from the low thousands of euros for an uncontested matter. A contested appeal before the Cour d'appel will involve substantially higher fees. Translation and apostille costs add a further amount, generally in the low hundreds of euros per document. Huissier fees for service and enforcement are regulated and relatively predictable.

Many underestimate the cost of translation. Ukrainian court judgments can be lengthy, and certified legal translation into French is charged per page. A complex commercial judgment of fifty pages or more can generate translation costs running into the low thousands of euros.

A debtor seeking to block exequatur in France has a limited but meaningful toolkit. The most commonly raised defences are lack of international jurisdiction of the Ukrainian court, violation of due process in the Ukrainian proceedings, and conflict with French international public policy.

On jurisdiction, the debtor may argue that the Ukrainian court lacked competence under French conflict-of-laws standards. This defence is most credible where the debtor is domiciled in France and the contract contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of French courts. Creditors should anticipate this argument and document the basis for Ukrainian jurisdiction - for example, the place of performance of the contract, the domicile of the defendant at the time of proceedings, or a jurisdiction clause selecting Ukrainian courts.

On due process, the debtor may claim that they were not properly served in Ukraine and therefore could not defend themselves. This is a serious defence that French courts take carefully. Creditors should ensure that service of process in the Ukrainian proceedings was carried out in accordance with the Hague Service Convention, to which both Ukraine and France are parties. Proof of proper service is a critical document in the exequatur file.

On public policy, the debtor may argue that the Ukrainian judgment violates French ordre public international. This defence is interpreted narrowly by French courts; it applies only to fundamental principles of French legal order, not to mere differences in substantive law. Punitive damages far exceeding actual loss, or judgments obtained through manifest procedural abuse, are the most realistic public-policy arguments. Standard commercial or contractual judgments rarely trigger this defence successfully.

A common mistake made by creditors is filing an incomplete application - missing the apostille, lacking a certified translation, or failing to provide proof that the judgment is final. French courts will reject or suspend an incomplete application, causing delay. Assembling a complete, well-organised file from the outset is the single most effective way to avoid unnecessary setbacks.

If you are preparing an exequatur application or assessing the strength of a Ukrainian judgment for enforcement in France, contact info@vlolawfirm.com. We can help structure the setup correctly the first time.

Scenario one: a Ukrainian company with a commercial debt judgment. A Ukrainian supplier obtained a judgment against a French buyer who refused to pay for delivered goods. The Ukrainian court had jurisdiction because the contract was performed in Ukraine and the parties had not agreed on an exclusive foreign forum. The judgment is final, apostilled, and accompanied by proof of service on the French buyer through the Hague Service Convention channel. In this scenario, the exequatur application is straightforward. The main risk is a jurisdiction challenge, which is manageable given the clear contractual nexus to Ukraine. The creditor should move quickly to file a precautionary seizure of the debtor's French bank accounts simultaneously with or immediately after the exequatur application, to prevent asset dissipation.

Scenario two: an individual creditor with a Ukrainian tort judgment. A Ukrainian individual obtained a judgment against a French national for damages arising from a business dispute. The French defendant was served in Ukraine through official channels but claims the service was defective. In this scenario, the due-process defence is the central risk. The creditor must produce detailed evidence of the service procedure, including official records from the Ukrainian court and any acknowledgement of receipt. If service was carried out correctly under the Hague Convention, the French court will likely dismiss the defence. If there is any doubt about service regularity, the creditor should obtain a supplementary certificate from the Ukrainian court confirming the procedural steps taken.

In practice, founders and creditors should consider whether the debtor holds identifiable assets in France before investing in exequatur proceedings. A judgment against an insolvent or asset-free debtor produces no recovery regardless of its legal validity. Asset tracing - through French commercial registers, property records, and banking information requests - should precede or accompany the legal process.

What happens if the Ukrainian judgment was issued in default of appearance by the French defendant?

A default judgment is not automatically disqualifying in France, but it attracts closer scrutiny on the due-process condition. The French court will examine whether the French defendant was properly served with the Ukrainian proceedings and had a genuine opportunity to appear and defend. If service was carried out through the Hague Service Convention and the defendant simply chose not to participate, French courts generally accept the judgment. If service was irregular or purely formal, the exequatur is likely to be refused. Creditors holding default judgments should gather all service documentation before filing and consider obtaining a supplementary certificate from the Ukrainian court detailing the notification procedure.

How long does the full enforcement process take, and what does it cost in broad terms?

An uncontested exequatur can be completed in two to three months, after which standard enforcement tools become available. A contested case before the Cour d'appel typically adds eight to twenty months. Professional fees for an uncontested matter start from the low thousands of euros; a contested appeal will cost considerably more. Translation and apostille costs depend on the length and complexity of the judgment. Creditors should budget for the full contested scenario as a planning baseline, while hoping for an uncontested outcome. Precautionary seizure of assets can be sought at an early stage to protect the creditor's position during the proceedings.

Is it possible to enforce a Ukrainian arbitral award in France instead of a court judgment?

Yes, and in some respects it is easier. France is a party to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, as is Ukraine. A Ukrainian arbitral award - issued by a recognised arbitral institution or under an ad hoc arbitration agreement - can be enforced in France through the New York Convention procedure, which is well-established and widely used. The grounds for refusal under the New York Convention are similar to the exequatur conditions but are applied with a strong pro-enforcement presumption. If a creditor holds both a Ukrainian court judgment and a Ukrainian arbitral award on the same dispute, the arbitral award route is generally faster and more predictable.

Enforcing a Ukrainian court judgment in France is a structured, achievable process for a creditor who prepares carefully. The exequatur procedure applies because no bilateral treaty exists between Ukraine and France. French courts apply a limited review focused on jurisdiction, due process, public policy, and the absence of fraud - not a re-examination of the merits. A complete, well-documented application, supported by apostilled documents and certified translations, gives a Ukrainian judgment a strong foundation for recognition.

VLO Law Firm advises international clients on judgment enforcement in Ukraine and cross-border recognition proceedings. We can assist with preparing exequatur applications, coordinating Ukrainian court documentation, apostille and translation requirements, and enforcement strategy in France. To request a consultation, contact: info@vlolawfirm.com