France
Courts in France
The two court orders of France, the courts that sit in each, and the routes of appeal — described from the Ministry of Justice's own account rather than by analogy with another country.
Facts on this page were checked against their sources on .
France has two court orders with separate hierarchies. Which order hears a case depends on the nature of the dispute, not on where it arises or how serious it is.
Within the judicial order, the Ministry of Justice lists the tribunal judiciaire and the tribunal de proximité as the general civil courts, alongside specialised civil jurisdictions: the conseil de prud'hommes for employment matters, the tribunal de commerce, and the tribunal paritaire des baux ruraux for rural leases.
The criminal courts of the judicial order are the tribunal de police, the tribunal correctionnel, the cour criminelle départementale and the cour d'assises. These are not four levels of one ladder: they are distinguished principally by the seriousness and classification of the offence.
Appeals within the judicial order go to the cour d'appel, which the Ministry describes as a second-degree jurisdiction hearing appeals against judgments of first-instance courts. At the top of the judicial order sits the Cour de cassation.
The administrative order runs from the tribunal administratif, through the cour administrative d'appel, to the Conseil d'État as its highest jurisdiction. Where the two orders disagree about which of them is competent, the Tribunal des conflits decides.
The same idea, explained generally
- What do courts do?
Courts resolve disputes, test the state’s case against individuals, interpret law, and review public decisions. This guide explains those functions and why judicial independence is structural.
- What is due process?
Due process is the requirement that the state follow fair, established procedures before it takes action against a person. This guide explains what it typically includes and how it differs between systems.
Sources
Sources
L'organisation des cours et tribunaux
Ministère de la justice (France) · Government publication · link verified 2026-07-24
The Ministry of Justice's own account of court organisation. Supports: the division into ordre judiciaire and ordre administratif; the naming of the tribunal judiciaire, tribunal de proximité, conseil de prud'hommes, tribunal de commerce, tribunal paritaire des baux ruraux, tribunal de police, tribunal correctionnel, cour criminelle départementale, cour d'assises, cour d'appel and Cour de cassation; the three administrative levels (tribunal administratif, cour administrative d'appel, Conseil d'État); and the role of the Tribunal des conflits. A structural self-description: it does not support claims about caseload, effectiveness, or the competence thresholds allocating cases between courts. Undated on the page, so it supports current structure as at the verification date only.
Constitution du 4 octobre 1958 (texte intégral en vigueur)
Conseil constitutionnel · Legislation · 1958-10-04 · link verified 2026-08-10
Authentic consolidated text published by the Conseil constitutionnel. Supports: Article 1 (indivisible Republic; decentralised organisation); Article 64 (President as guarantor of the independence of the judicial authority, assisted by the Conseil supérieur de la magistrature); Article 66 (judicial authority as guardian of individual liberty); Article 72 (categories of territorial collectivity); Article 72-3 (the ten named overseas territories); Articles 73 and 74 (the two overseas regimes); the title of Title VIII ('De l'autorité judiciaire') and of Title XIII (transitional provisions on New Caledonia). Re-verified on 10 August 2026 for Wave 6, which additionally establishes from the same text: Article 65, that the Conseil supérieur de la magistrature comprises a formation for magistrats du siège and one for magistrats du parquet, that the siège formation 'statue comme conseil de discipline des magistrats du siège' and that the parquet formation 'donne son avis sur les sanctions disciplinaires qui les concernent'; and Article 71-1, that 'Le Défenseur des droits veille au respect des droits et libertés par les administrations de l'Etat, les collectivités territoriales, les établissements publics, ainsi que par tout organisme investi d'une mission de service public', that he may be seized by any person believing themselves harmed and may act d'office, that he is appointed by the President of the Republic for a non-renewable mandate of six years incompatible with membership of the Government or Parliament, and that he reports on his activity to the President of the Republic and to Parliament. Does NOT support any claim about how these provisions are applied in practice, nor about the internal organisation of any institution. WAVE 19 ADDITION, read from the same authentic consolidated text (version to the constitutional revision of 8 March 2024). Supports Article 61, review BEFORE promulgation: organic laws before promulgation, the propositions de loi mentioned in Article 11 before being submitted to referendum, and the rules of the parliamentary assemblies before their entry into application "doivent être soumis au Conseil constitutionnel qui se prononce sur leur conformité à la Constitution"; that for the same purposes ordinary laws "peuvent être déférées au Conseil constitutionnel, avant leur promulgation" by the President of the Republic, the Prime Minister, the President of the National Assembly, the President of the Senate, or sixty deputies or sixty senators; that the Council must rule within one month, reduced to eight days at the Government's request in urgency; and that referral suspends the time limit for promulgation. Supports Article 61-1, review AFTER promulgation on referral: "Lorsque, à l'occasion d'une instance en cours devant une juridiction, il est soutenu qu'une disposition législative porte atteinte aux droits et libertés que la Constitution garantit, le Conseil constitutionnel peut être saisi de cette question sur renvoi du Conseil d'État ou de la Cour de cassation qui se prononce dans un délai déterminé" — the question reaches the Council only through one of the two apex courts, which acts as a filter. Supports Article 62, the differing EFFECTS: a provision declared unconstitutional on the basis of Article 61 "ne peut être promulguée ni mise en application"; a provision declared unconstitutional on the basis of Article 61-1 "est abrogée à compter de la publication de la décision du Conseil constitutionnel ou d'une date ultérieure fixée par cette décision", with the Council determining the conditions and limits within which effects the provision has already produced may be called into question; and that the decisions of the Conseil constitutionnel "ne sont susceptibles d'aucun recours" and bind the public powers and all administrative and judicial authorities. Supports no claim about how often either route is used or about outcomes. WAVE 20 ADDITION. Read from the same authentic consolidated text on the Conseil constitutionnel's site. Supports Constitution du 4 octobre 1958, Article 36: “ARTICLE 36. L'état de siège est décrété en Conseil des ministres. Sa prorogation au-delà de douze jours ne peut être autorisée que par le Parlement.”. Supports Constitution du 4 octobre 1958, Article 16, first two paragraphs: “Lorsque les institutions de la République, l'indépendance de la nation, l'intégrité de son territoire ou l'exécution de ses engagements internationaux sont menacées d'une manière grave et immédiate et que le fonctionnement régulier des pouvoirs publics constitutionnels est interrompu, le Président de la République prend les mesures exigées par ces circonstances, après consultation officielle du Premier ministre, des présidents des assemblées ainsi que du Conseil constitutionnel. Il en informe la nation par un message.”. Supports Constitution du 4 octobre 1958, Article 16, final paragraph: “Après trente jours d'exercice des pouvoirs exceptionnels, le Conseil constitutionnel peut être saisi par le Président de l'Assemblée nationale, le Président du Sénat, soixante députés ou soixante sénateurs, aux fins d'examiner si les conditions énoncées au premier alinéa demeurent réunies. Il se prononce dans les délais les plus brefs par un avis public. Il procède de plein droit à cet examen et se prononce dans les mêmes conditions au terme de soixante jours d'exercice des pouvoirs exceptionnels et à tout moment au-delà de cette durée.”. Supports Constitution du 4 octobre 1958, Article 66: “ARTICLE 66. Nul ne peut être arbitrairement détenu. L'autorité judiciaire, gardienne de la liberté individuelle, assure le respect de ce principe dans les conditions prévues par la loi.”. Cited for the constitutional architecture of French exceptional powers and for the thirty-day review clock the 2008 revision built into Article 16. It records no use of Article 16, states nothing about the état d'urgence, which is statutory and cited separately, and supports no claim about any other country.