The case has already been referred to the judge, but I want to avoid a lengthy procedure: what are the possible alternatives for reaching an agreement?
Since 2023, two new mechanisms have been available to help you reach an agreement while remaining within the judicial framework: the amicable settlement hearing (ARA) and the trial split.
The amicable settlement hearing (ARA)
The ARA is a conciliation session supervised by a specially appointed judge, who is not the one who will make the decision in the event of disagreement, to enable you to reach an agreement at the end of this special hearing where lawyers do not plead.
1- You can request the ARA, or it may be proposed by the judge hearing the case with your agreement. It has the effect of interrupting the proceedings without removing the initial judge from the case.
2- The hearing takes place in camera (in chambers), without a clerk, in a strictly confidential setting. You attend in person, accompanied by your lawyer.
3- The conciliating judge (other than the one you have referred the matter to) may use any conciliation or mediation techniques, assess needs, facilitate the exchange of information, remind parties of the rules of law, and even visit the site of the dispute if necessary.
4- If an agreement is reached, it can be recorded in a binding report.
There are many advantages to this amicable settlement hearing:
● Time dedicated to dialogue, without contentious tension;
● Neutrality of the judge, ensuring the balance of the process;
● Confidentiality of exchanges, unless otherwise agreed;
● Possibility of a binding, rapid, and secure agreement;
● Procedural flexibility, without excessive formalism.
The trial split
It is a procedural mechanism that allows the judge to quickly decide certain questions of principle, while leaving the rest of the dispute to be resolved amicably (mediation, conciliation, or participatory procedure). It requires an express agreement, formalized by a document countersigned by lawyers and presented to the pre-trial judge.
The judge then rules on the essential legal points (e.g., the principle of an applicable matrimonial regime, the right to compensatory payments, etc.) and invites you to reach an agreement on the measures to be applied (e.g., the exact amount, payment schedule, etc.).
A partial closure order is issued and a partial judgment is handed down, which may be appealed immediately. The proceedings continue for the remainder of the dispute, if necessary.
Advantages:
● Significant time savings: a judgment on the key points allows the case to move forward;
● Legal clarity: you know precisely on what basis to continue the discussion;
● Open to amicable settlement: the judge’s intervention does not prevent further negotiations;
● Procedural flexibility: allows for a combination of partial litigation and amicable settlement.
Gaëtan ESCUDEY will assist you in implementing these tools by analyzing your situation, developing the most appropriate procedural strategy, and defending your interests at every stage.