The reform of contract law has introduced new principles and prerogatives for judicial judges, emphasizing amicable dispute resolution and extending judicial powers.
Extract
[...] Today, this article is Article 1103, and the term 'agreement' has been replaced with 'contract'." The ordinance did not revisit the principle of non-interference of the judge in contractual disputes but rather considered new solutions. B. A principle supported by the reform through the development of amicable solutions The reform of contract law has added new provisions and transformed the procedure related to the judge's seizure in the event of resolution of contract disputes into a supplementary solution. The first solution has become the resolution of the dispute 'amicably' that is to say by mutual agreement between the parties. [...]
[...] It continues to perform its obligations during the renegotiation. In the event of refusal or failure of the renegotiation, the parties may agree on the termination of the contract, at the date and conditions they determine, or jointly request the judge ». In this article, the first solution aims to resolve the dispute between the parties only, and then if this solution proves ineffective, they may agree amicably to bring the judge in, and finally if this solution again seems not to suit one of the parties, it may unilaterally bring the judge in. [...]
[...] What is the impact of the reform of contract law on the role of the judge in the execution of the contract? « The Role of the Judge in the Execution of the Contract Article 12 of the Civil Procedure Code provides that 'the judge decides the dispute in accordance with the rules of law applicable to him'. Therefore, in law, equity is not the only principle, the judge must perform his mission in accordance with the rules of law that govern him. [...]
[...] Therefore, even if the judicial judge must intervene on the contract, it cannot be modified solely with the consent of the parties. Finally, these solutions have certainly profoundly changed the role of the judicial judge and may be the subject of many criticisms, but contract law had to be reformed, many principles dated back to 1804, the Napoleonic era being greatly outdated, some principles could and should be updated in light of the instability presented by contract law. New solutions were imposed to ensure the legal security of the rule of law. [...]
[...] A strict principle: the non-interference of the judge in contract law The Enlightenment century was the cradle of many fundamental principles in law. One of the most illustrious philosophers marked history with a founding theory of our institutional and legal system: it is Montesquieu and the theory of the separation of powers thought in 1748 but which was highlighted by the French Revolution. This principle aims to ensure the separation between the legislative power, the executive power, and the judicial power from the moment the judges are independent and without constraints when they take a decision and the litigant is sure not to be harmed by a political influence. [...]
