Revision for Imprévision under Article 1195 of the Civil Code

Extract

[...] The practical difficulties of implementing Article 1195 of the Civil Code consecrated by the 2016 reform It was therefore necessary to wait for the 2016 reform to see the revision for imprévision consecrated in Article 1195 of the Civil Code. However, the entry into force of Article 1195 of the Civil Code by the 2016 reform was not so obvious. Initially, the ordinance excluded from its reform contracts and agreements concluded before the 1 October 2016, although in practice the jurisprudence takes into account the spirit of the reform to judge contracts prior by momentCass. 3e civ May 2016) and refused by others by refusing to apply by anticipation the imprévisionAix June 2016, n° 15/10056). [...]

[...] It remains that it is now concretized in positive law. The judge can now revise a contract for imprudence. However, it has also been necessary to specify the legal scope of this new competence, which remains today quite interrogative. The case law has since then shown a very strict application of the criterion of unpredictability, which is the most important and broadest criterion for revision due to unforeseen circumstances ("imprévision")"T. com. Versailles October 2021, n° 2020F00301). [...]

[...] Civ March 1876), and to concretize the rejection of this theory of imprévision. The Court, under the guise of the old article 1134 of the Civil Code the conventions legally formed take the place of law for those who made them » affirm that « in no case, it does not belong to the courts, however equitable their decision may appear, to take into account the time and circumstances to modify the conventions of the parties and substitute new clauses for those that have been freely accepted by the contracting parties ». [...]

[...] Causing harm to the security and intangibility of the contract, a principle very dear to Civil Law. The revision for imprévision, which was previously found only in administrative law in a different form, makes its entry into the Law of Obligations through this 2016 reform. Article 1195 of the Civil Code now allows, when a change in unforeseen circumstances, at the time of contract conclusion, makes its execution excessively costly for one of the parties who did not accept the risk, to request renegotiation with its co-contractor. [...]

[...] The revision for imprévision has made a long and hesitant entry into positive law once its implementation by the 2016 reform, its vast field of application accompanied by the judge's prudence, has made it a creator of instability I. The revision for imprévision, making a long and hesitant entry into positive law The arrival of the revision for imprévision by the 2016 reform constitutes the culmination of a volatile jurisprudential journeyA), here, once consecrated, to pose a number of difficulties of practical applicationsB). [...]