Extract
[...] In fact, a company is not really impacted by an individual action of a justiciable, but can be when an association acts on behalf of all individuals for the same facts. However, this class action, of American origin, is not very developed in France and does not work. Therefore, expanding the field of action of associations can allow for the responsibility of companies, provided that the associations act in defense of their interests falling within the scope of their social object. [...]
[...] Consequently, if the class action was not admissible due to a lack of standing to act in the first instance, the association changes its legal grounds on appeal. The association no longer acts as a representative to be done of a class action, but acts on the basis of common law, to defend the interests of its social object. In fact, an association is a legal entity, which holds its own material and moral interests, and can act in court even in the absence of authorization. [...]
[...] Court of Cassation, Civil Chamber March No. 21-13.970 - To what extent does the Court of Cassation confirm its jurisprudence favorable to the actions brought by associations in the defense of collective interests of their social object? Private Judicial Law: Commentary: Cass., Civ., 1ère March 2022: The action in court is subject to the justification by the litigant of an interest to act but also of the quality to act. For legal persons, this interest to act can be more difficult to characterize. [...]
[...] However, the Court of Cassation rejects the reasoning of the Court of Appeal. According to the solution of the Court of Cassation, "When no provision of the statutes provides a restriction on the geographical scope of the association's action, the action brought by it may be introduced before any jurisdiction territorially competent ». This rule extends the interest to act of associations, which decide sovereignly of their statutes. Therefore, if the drafters of the statutes do not indicate any geographical limitation of the association's action in justice, the latter has the capacity to defend its interests on the entire territory, and to bring its action before any competent jurisdiction. [...]
[...] In this case, the association is acting against two companies and their insurer. The domicile of the company is characterized in principle by its registered office. Thus, the association that introduces a lawsuit must in principle seize the jurisdiction of the registered office of the companies, unless the dispute falls within a matter cited by Article 46 of the CPC. Therefore, this jurisprudence, favorable to the right of action of associations, allows them to seize any territorially competent jurisdiction, subject to statutory restrictions. [...]
