News 23 september 2025
23 september 2025 Abuse of power by the investigating chamber Cass. crim., 23 September 2025, no. 25-82.889 When an investigating chamber overturns a dismissal order issued by the investigating judge and chooses to refer the case back to the latter without discussing the matter, it cannot impose guidelines on the conduct of the investigation, lest it exceed its authority. In a recent case, the investigating chamber referred proceedings back to the investigating judge for further investigation and the indictment of certain individuals for aggravated manslaughter. However, by doing so without discussing the case or ordering further investigation, the chamber violated articles 204, 205 and 207(2) of the code of criminal procedure. This decision is in line with the established case law of the criminal division of the Court of Cassation, which states that the investigating chamber cannot refer the case back to the investigating judge with an order to place individuals under investigation (Cass. crim 25 juin 1996, n° 96-81.239, Bull. crim 1996, n° 272, p. 819 ; Cass. crim. 1er oct. 2024, n° 24-82.133 ).
News 3 september 2025
3 september 2025 Law & Digital Technology: an important clarification for software publishers! Cass. 1st civ., 3 September 2025, no. 24-13.155 In a software infringement case, the Court of Cassation has just reiterated the method for calculating compensation. It must be assessed based on the number of actual users of the disputed application, i.e. those who have purchased a licence to use it, and not based on the number of installations of the application. The Court of Appeal had recognised the existence of acts of infringement but limited the compensation for the plaintiff company’s loss to an amount calculated on the basis of the number of customers using the disputed application. The publisher argued that the infringing mass should include every act of reproduction of the software. In a ruling dated 3 September 2025 (appeal no. 24-13.155), the First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dismissed the appeal. It considered that the Court of Appeal had correctly compensated for the negative economic consequences of the infringement by taking into account the number of licences actually purchased by users, rather than the number of installations of the software. The principle remains that of full compensation for the damage caused by the infringement, without loss or profit for the injured party.
News 3 september 2025
3 september 2025 State liability and limitation period Cass. 1st civ. 3 September 2025, no. 24-14.644. In an action for liability brought against the State on the grounds of a fault on the part of the public justice service that deprived a victim of the possibility of receiving damages, the limitation period cannot begin to run before the decision awarding those damages has been rendered, i.e. before the victim has actually been in a position to take action. In this case, as part of a criminal investigation, assets had been seized before being returned following an order by the investigating judge dated 20 February 2017. This order had not been notified to the civil parties, who were unaware of its existence and had been unable to appeal it. It was only when a decision on civil interests was made on 31 December 2021 that the victims discovered that the funds had been returned.They summoned the State’s judicial agent with a view to holding the State liable for misconduct in the functioning of the public justice service, in particular due to the failure to notify them of the order. While Article 1 of Law No. 68-1250 of 31 December 1968 provides for a four-year limitation period for claims against the State, Article 3 of that text specifies that this period does not apply to creditors who are unable to take action. This was reiterated by the First Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation in a ruling dated 3 September 2025 (appeal No. 24-14.644), overturning the ruling of the Paris Court of Appeal, which had ruled that the action brought by litigants against the State’s judicial officer was time-barred. The Court of Appeal had taken as the starting point for the limitation period the disputed restitution order of the investigating judge of 20 February 2017, so that the limitation period had expired on 31 December 2021. The Court of Cassation points out that the limitation period can only begin to run once the victim is in a position to take action, i.e. from the date of the decision awarding damages, which in this case was 31 December 2021. This decision serves as a reminder that the limitation period for liability actions against the State is strictly regulated in order to protect victims of judicial malpractice and guarantee them genuine access to compensation.
News 11 september 2025
11 september 2025 Association, membership and termination of the mooring contract Cass. 3rd civ., 11 September 2025, no.24-11.249 A member of a yacht club since 2010 occupied a berth under a mooring contract concluded in 2018 with the association. Due to non-payment of the fees stipulated in the mooring contract, the association notified him of the termination of the contract, removed the boat and expelled him from the association. Considering that the decision to expel him did not comply with the procedure provided for in the articles of association, the Court of Appeal ordered the association to reinstate the member and to provide him with a berth equivalent to the one he had occupied. In a ruling dated 11 September 2025 (appeal no. 24-11.249), the Third Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation partially overturned this decision. Even if the exclusion decision was irregular, it had no impact on the termination of the mooring contract, which was justified by the member’s failure to fulfil his obligation to pay the membership fee. These two sanctions are independent and the association may obtain the termination of the mooring contract in accordance with Article 1224 of the Civil Code. Key point: The exclusion procedure and contractual termination are based on two distinct rationales. The regularity of one does not necessarily affect the legitimacy of the other.
News 3 september 2025
Welcome to our new trainee lawyers ! second semester We are delighted to welcome three trainee lawyers to Piwnica & Molinié as part of their PPI internship at the EFB. Their arrival marks the beginning of a wonderful collaboration, and we look forward to supporting them in this important stage of their training. 📸 (From left to right in the photo): Elie Frémont, who holds a Master’s degree in Public Policy and a Master’s degree in Public Economic Law from the Sciences Po law school, has joined the public law department. Théophile Tremeau, a graduate of the Master’s in Business Law and Taxation at Paris II – Panthéon-Assas University, has joined the private law team. Majda Abikchi, a graduate of the Master’s in International Affairs at the University of Rennes I, has also joined the public law department. We wish them a rewarding experience and are very pleased to have them on board!
