France's Ministry of Justice Initiates Task Force to Reform French Arbitration Law

On 12 November 2024, Didier Migaud, the then French Minister of Justice, created a task force dedicated to reforming French arbitration law. Four months later, on Thursday 20 March 2025, the working group on the reform of French arbitration law submitted its report. The report was shared and debated with the arbitration community in April 2025 during Paris arbitration week. 

This initiative aims to finetune the French legal framework, gather the legal provision relating to arbitration in a dedicated code and enhance France's attractiveness as a leading hub for international arbitration. The propositions of the working group are still to be debated with practitioners before any reform will take place so it is unlikely that we will see any new provisions in force before the end of the year. 

Task Force leadership and composition

The task force was co-chaired by François Ancel, a renowned judge at the Cour de Cassation, and Thomas Clay, a professor at the Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne and a prominent arbitration practitioner. The group comprised a diverse array of experts, including magistrates, academics, lawyers, and representatives from arbitration institutions.

Objectives, scope of the reform and next steps

The primary objective of the task force was to evaluate current arbitration law and identify areas for improvement.  

This initiative underscores France's commitment to maintaining its status as a premier destination for arbitration. By finetuning its pioneering arbitration law, in an unstable international context, France aims to enhance its legal framework's clarity, efficiency, and international competitiveness.

Following the presentation of the report, a review process has been initiated and will include consultations with stakeholders in the arbitration community to ensure a comprehensive and inclusive approach to reform.

Two main steps will follow: 

• a first set of amendments on the consensual topics by way of decree, ideally by summer 2025;
• a second phase to address non-consensual topics and topics which require a bill of law. 

Previous groundbreaking reforms

Fench arbitration law has undergone significant reforms over the years to maintain its competitiveness and attractiveness. This has included the introduction of groundbreaking concepts such as the independence of the arbitration clause from the main contract and establishing the "competence-competence" principle. 

Additional reforms have enhanced the readability of French arbitration law for foreigners, either by implementing caselaw into the Code of civil procedure or, as with the advent of the autonomy principle, emanating from the rulings of the French Court of Cassation and the Paris Court of Appeal.

The purpose of the upcoming reform is not merely to codify pre-existing and uncontested rules, but rather to directly tackle controversial issues, such as those relating to European law, and other external factors which have complicated arbitration law as it arose since the start of the current century. Nevertheless, while the French government has large powers to reform arbitration law alone, some substantial issues will require the involvement of the Parliament.

Main suggestions of the working group

The report suggests various improvements that will be heavily debated/challenged in the coming months. 

• Creation of the Code de l’arbitrage

The task force recommends the creation of a Code de l’arbitrage to gather all the rules relating to arbitration in the same place and remove outdated texts of law legacy which are a source of confusion (notably former restrictions long since neutralized by French caselaw and international treaties).

This is a great opportunity to remind readers that, traditionally, codification in civil law countries is used to transcribe the main principles and necessary rules of law: it is supposed to stay abstract. Indeed, the main idea is not to attempt to foresee everything: once a law is in force, it cannot be amended easily and, therefore, it is better to make room for the judge to adapt it to unexpected events, to enable them to exercise their discretion. The creation of a Code de l’arbitrage is not the creation of a set of numerous and specific rules of law to address every possible issue: instead, it is an opportunity to clarify the framework of arbitration for legal certainty and should not be viewed as a way to deprive the judge of their discretion.

• Convergence between domestic and international arbitration 

The creation of a code would be a great opportunity to deepen convergence between domestic and international arbitration regimes, with special rules for domestic arbitration on a limited number of issues. 

Nevertheless, the liberalism of French arbitration law traditionally relies on this distinction: laws prohibiting or restricting arbitration were confined to domestic arbitration. Therefore, one should be careful not to mistakenly submit international arbitration to restrictive outdated rules.

• The rise of fundamental principles of arbitration 

Another proposal relates to the creation of a formal set of fundamental principles of international arbitration. Many principles already guide arbitration law such as : autonomy of the arbitration agreement, competence-competence, efficiency of the proceedings, good faith of the parties during the proceedings, liberty to choose the law applicable to the dispute, the possibility of the tribunal to take into account the established business practice of the parties in dispute, res judicata of arbitral awards, enforcement of an arbitral award set aside by the courts of the seat of the arbitration, confidentiality, independence and impartiality of arbitrators, egality between the parties, etc. 

None of these principles are new, but providing for them explicitly in a single code at a single place (the Code of civil procedure already provide for most of these principles, but they are dispatched in various sections) would be a great opportunity to make them more visible for practitioners unfamiliar with French arbitration law. 

• Clarification of substantive rules related to arbitration 

The task force’s scope was not limited to formal issues relating to the general principles of arbitration. It was also invited to clarify the rules relating to the arbitrability of disputes, especially disputes not related to business, such as those involving consumer, labor or family laws. 

For impecunious parties, the working group suggests offering the possibility to request the support of the juge d’appui (supporting judge; he or she is a magistrate who intervenes to resolve procedural or organizational difficulties that may arise during the course of arbitration) to adapt the procedural framework to avoid a potential denial of justice (e.g. adaptation of the arbitration to reduce costs, change of arbitrator if the arbitration fees are too expansive, etc.). 

• Efficiency of arbitration 

The efficiency of arbitral proceedings could also be enhanced by offering the possibility to request before the juge d’appui the enforcement of provisional and conservatory measures decided by the arbitral tribunal, and by clarifying the power of the arbitrators with regard to penalties decided for the violation of their orders. 

• Anticipating new subject matters such as AI

Recent trends have also been addressed, such as digital-only arbitral awards or the suggestion that an AI system could perform as the arbitrator or part of the arbitral tribunal. . 

On the latter, the task force is of the opinion that the arbitrator shall remain a natural person (however, this does not prevent arbitration by legal persons as long as the nomination of the legal entity as an arbitrator means that a specific natural person will issue the award). 

• French procedural rules regarding the review of arbitral awards 

With regard to French procedural rules, the task force – in line with many French practitioners – advocates for the exclusive jurisdiction of the civil courts for the review of international arbitral awards, and for the exclusion of the review of international arbitral awards by the administrative courts. The group suggests providing for the possibility for civil courts to request the opinion of the administrative courts if necessary. 

The efficiency of the enforcement and recognition proceedings in France of the award could also be enhanced by the creation of an ad hoc set of procedural rules for disputes relating to arbitration. On the ground to set aside, the group suggests forbidding parties to claim for the first time before the annulment judge that the arbitral tribunal had no jurisdiction.

More generally, for domestic arbitrations, the task force suggests the creation of a specialised jurisdiction for arbitration cases, like the existing specialised courts for international arbitration. 

• Various legal issues related to the arbitration framework

The task force has invited the legislator to clarify various issues  such as the legal framework for the relationship between arbitrators and the parties, or the rights of third parties relating to the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. 

• Refining texts 

The task force finally suggests the refinement of French texts, for instance by substituting the reference to “the interests of international business” with the broader concept of “international economic interests”, or by abandoning the possibility to waive recourse against arbitral awards (there are various risks for the parties, and it was never used). 

An echo to the English Arbitration Act 2025? 

Whilst the French initiative seeks to refine its arbitration framework, parallels can be drawn with recent legislative developments in England, where the English Arbitration Act 2025 has  recently been enacted. Although not a wholesale revamp of the former English arbitration regime, this new law, which received Royal Ascent on 24^th February 2025 but is not yet in force, updates some key provisions of the 1996 Arbitration Act and introduces several noteworthy changes:

• Enhanced clarity on how the governing law is determined for arbitration clauses. The amendment introduces a clear default rule applying the law of the seat to arbitration agreements, simplifying the complex Enka v Chubb test
• A mandatory requirement for arbitrators to disclose any potential conflicts of interest, 
• Expedited procedures empowering tribunals to rapidly dispose of unmeritorious claims, 
• Increased deference to arbitral tribunals on jurisdictional challenges, limiting de novo judicial review,
• A mechanism for enforcing provisional measures, including those issued by emergency arbitrators, before courts, and
• Codification of waiver principles preventing late-stage objections that could have been raised before the tribunal.

Just as the French reform aims to reinforce efficiency and clarity in arbitration proceedings, the English reform shares similar goals of enhancing procedural effectiveness.

The differences between the French and English legal systems are reflected in the types of reform proposed by the French initiative compared to the reforms enacted under the Arbitration Act 2025.  French law has different demands which are reflected in the proposals yet there are some similarities. It will be interesting to see which proposals are successful. 

A debate on the opportunity to reform French arbitration law

The report addresses several controversial issues. Some suggestions obviously need to be weighted carefully and have already stimulated intense debate between supporters of codification and supporters of the status quo at Paris Arbitration Week. For instance, the reform suggests to grant  the annulment court the power to order, if relevant, a party to submit to the arbitral tribunal a claim raised for the first time during the request to set aside the award, in order to protect the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal).

These debates demonstrate that the report has successfully opened a dialog between practitioners and the legislator on the best way to enhance the efficiency of arbitration. This is good news as some controversial solutions require the enacted law to be changed. Every practitioner should grab this chance to underline issues/uncertainties they want to be addressed. 

Conclusion

As with the consultations that took place on the occasion of the reform of the English Arbitration Act, this report is a unique opportunity to share thoughts with the French legislator and judges on the refinement of arbitration law. However, it is unlikely that French law will change fundamentally. French arbitration law will remain liberal and business friendly as it always was. Yet, this is a chance to address current uncertainties which relate to contemporaneous issues in an ever-changing world.

During Paris Arbitration Week, the arbitration community intensely debated the opportunity to adapt or not the numerous issues addressed by the task force. A first set of amendments on the consensual topics could arise by summer 2025 and no specific deadline has been decided yet for the more complex issues. We will continue to update you as we know more about the reforms and their impact. 

If you would like to discuss the potential changes to French arbitration law further and the impact on any potential dispute, please reach out to one of the authors of this update.