On October 12 and 14, 2026, in the Badinter auditorium of the Maison des avocats, the Paris Judicial Court (tribunal judiciaire de Paris) and the Paris Bar held two family law workshops on amicable dispute resolution during mediation week, “Amicable and contractual justice: toward new practices.” I spoke alongside judges, the Vice-President of the Bar, lawyer-mediators and a notary. Here are the key takeaways, and the presentation materials.
A common thread: litigation as the framework for agreement
Both workshops shared one idea: negotiating in the shadow of the judge. Litigation is not the failure of amicable resolution; handled well, it provides the framework, the timetable and the leverage. Lawyers do not have to choose between litigating and negotiating: they go to court to frame and pace the negotiation, then bring the agreement back to the judge to secure it.
The court’s family division is where amicable resolution matters most: a revived “double summons” practice, orders to attend a mediation information meeting, parenting coordination for high-conflict cases, a “parental consensus” procedure under development and an information booklet for parents.
Parental responsibility: four tools, four moments
The first workshop started from the texts: the family judge (juge aux affaires familiales) may suggest mediation or order the parents to meet a mediator (art. 373-2-10, Civil Code); the judge approves the parenting agreement after checking the child’s interests and the parents’ free consent (art. 373-2-7, Civil Code); refusing without legitimate reason to comply with an order to meet a mediator can lead to a civil fine (art. 1533 et seq., Code of Civil Procedure).
Each tool has its moment: out-of-court mediation before any filing, the order to meet a mediator or the double summons as soon as the case is filed, court-ordered mediation during proceedings, and the participatory procedure (procédure participative) before or during them. The choice depends on the state of the relationship: if dialogue is still possible, out-of-court mediation followed by court approval; if communication has broken down, an order to meet a mediator; if a severe conflict persists, parenting coordination.
The strategy has four steps: file to set the framework, with the hearing date becoming the clock of the negotiation; offer amicable resolution in the application itself; rely on the social inquiry or the hearing of the child to refocus the discussion; and bring the agreement back to the judge for approval. Amicable resolution is the default route, except where there is violence or coercive control.
Family assets: establish the facts, unblock, secure
The second workshop dealt with the financial consequences of separation. Amicable resolution saves time, since a court-supervised division of property can outlast the divorce by years; it reduces costs, with one jointly appointed expert instead of two private reports followed by a court-ordered one; and it allows solutions a judge cannot impose: negotiated allocation of assets, an equalization payment in installments, temporary co-ownership, a tax-driven timetable.
The key tool was the contractual expert assessment of family assets: a tailored assignment (compensatory allowance, reimbursements between spouses, co-ownership accounts, lots), an inventory, a statement of assets in France and abroad and a bank account register (FICOBA) printout less than three months old. When the agreement is signed between lawyers, the expert’s report has the same value as a court-ordered investigative measure (arts. 131 to 131-8, Code of Civil Procedure).
Litigation remains a lever: disclosure is easier to negotiate when the judge can order it; the split trial (césure) allows the court to rule on the matrimonial property regime before the figures are negotiated; the amicable settlement hearing or a contractual pretrial phase speeds up the case.
Securing the agreement
An agreement is only worth what it delivers. The materials set out four routes: an agreement approved by the court during proceedings, a court-approved settlement, an agreement countersigned by the lawyers and declared enforceable by the court clerk, and a notarial deed, which is mandatory when the division covers real estate subject to land registration (art. 265-2, Civil Code). Each step referred to the model documents in the 2026 handbook (vadémécum) of the court and the Bar.
Sessions
- October 12, 2026, 2–5 p.m.: “Parental responsibility” workshop, with judges Stéphanie Hebrard and Céline Garnier, Carine Denoit-Benteux, Vice-President of the Paris Bar, and Fadela Houari, lawyer and mediator.
- October 14, 2026, 2–5 p.m.: “Family property law” workshop, with judges Claire Berger and Stéphanie Hebrard, Carine Denoit-Benteux, Vice-President of the Paris Bar, Andréa Plumel, lawyer and mediator, and Nathalie Couzigou-Suhas, notary.
Key takeaways
- 1The judge as frameworkFiling sets the negotiation timetable; court approval makes the agreement enforceable.
- 2Amicable by defaultFor children, a solution built by the parents, except where there is violence or coercive control.
- 3A tool for each momentOut-of-court mediation, order to meet a mediator, court-ordered mediation, participatory procedure: the choice depends on the stage of the case and the state of the dialogue.
- 4Disclosure firstInventory, FICOBA, assets abroad: without full disclosure, there is no lasting agreement on property.
- 5One shared expertAppointed by an agreement between lawyers, the expert’s report carries the same weight as a court-ordered investigative measure.
General information. This account of a talk reflects only my personal opinion and is not legal advice. The cases mentioned are fictional, or inspired by real cases, modified and anonymized.