2
Legal bases for clause removal: Art. L 621-2 (in connection with a criminal offence) and Arts. L 621-7/8 (civil proceedings based on EU-derived law) — both available simultaneously.
Zero
Consumer complaints required before an association can bring a clause removal action — the association can act preventively, based on its own analysis of contract terms.
All
Identical contracts in force that can be affected by a "deemed non-written" declaration — including contracts no longer offered to new customers but still running.

Two Routes to Clause Removal

French consumer law creates two legal routes by which an approved consumer association can seek the removal of unfair or unlawful clauses from a business's consumer contracts. The routes are distinct in their legal basis and procedural setting, but both lead to the same commercially disruptive outcome.

Route 1 — Criminal Proceedings Art. L 621-2 C. consom. Clause Removal Ancillary to Criminal Action
  • Activated when the association has constituted itself as civil party in criminal proceedings under Art. L 621-1
  • Applies to clauses contrary to a provision of public order (ordre public)
  • Covers contracts proposed to consumers and contracts currently in force — even if no longer offered to new customers
  • Clause can be declared deemed non-written in all identical in-force contracts, with consumer notification order
  • Juge des référés can also order removal on an urgent basis
Route 2 — Civil Proceedings Arts. L 621-7 and L 621-8 C. consom. Clause Removal as Preventive Civil Action
  • Standalone civil action — no criminal offence required
  • Must be based on a breach of EU-derived national consumer law
  • Applies to unfair or unlawful clauses in any contract proposed to consumers or in any in-force contract
  • Deemed non-written in all identical contracts + consumer notification at business's expense
  • Available without prior consumer complaint or prior negotiation

Which Clauses Are Targeted

Unlawful Clauses (Art. L 621-2)

Under the criminal law route, the target is clauses contrary to a provision of public order (clause illicite) — a concept that includes any contractual provision that breaches a legislative or regulatory rule from which the parties cannot derogate. Examples confirmed by the courts include clauses in standard construction contracts that violated public order provisions relating to acceptance of works, builder liability, the existence of land, the descriptive notice, and the revision index (CA Orléans, 21 June 1984; T. corr. Coutances, 2 May 1985).

Unfair Clauses (Arts. L 621-7 and L 621-8)

Under the civil route, the action targets unfair clauses (clauses abusives) in the sense of Art. L 212-1 of the Code de la consommation (transposing Directive 93/13/EEC) and unlawful clauses under any of the EU-derived consumer law provisions covered by Art. L 621-7. An unfair clause is one that creates a significant imbalance between the rights and obligations of the parties to the detriment of the consumer. The commission des clauses abusives publishes lists of grey and black clauses that provide useful reference points, though the court makes its own assessment.

Which Contracts Are Covered — and the Co-Ownership Exception

Both routes are limited to contracts proposed or intended for consumers. This boundary has generated important case law clarifying what falls inside and outside the action's scope.

Holiday Rental Standard Contract (Professional Association Model) Action Admissible
Cass. 1re civ., 3 February 2011, n° 08-14.402

An association obtained the removal of an unlawful clause from a standard holiday rental contract model published by a professional association and used between non-professional owners and consumers. The action was admissible even though the contract was drafted by an industry body: what mattered was that it was proposed to consumers.

Building Manager Contract with Co-Ownership Syndicates Action Inadmissible
Cass. 1re civ., 4 June 2014, n° 13-13.779

A consumer association could not challenge clauses in the contract proposed by a property agent to co-ownership syndicates, because co-ownership syndicates are non-professional legal persons — not consumers. The clause removal action under Art. L 621-7 is limited to contracts destined or proposed to consumers; it does not extend to contracts with non-professional legal entities.

Music Streaming Platform Terms and Conditions Action Admissible — Broad Scope
TJ Paris, 9 June 2020, n° 16-09799

An association successfully challenged clauses in a music streaming platform's general terms that raised data protection, copyright, and e-commerce directive issues. The court confirmed: (1) the action was admissible since the contract was proposed to consumers; (2) the association could act for users both in their capacity as consumers and as authors or data subjects; (3) demands must be formulated clause by clause, not as a challenge to the entire CGV; (4) clauses no longer offered to new users could still be challenged if they were in contracts currently in force.

Standard Property Sale Contracts (Public Order Clauses) Clauses Removed + Astreinte
CA Orléans, 21 June 1984; T. corr. Coutances, 2 May 1985

Associations obtained removal of clauses in standard residential construction contracts that violated public order provisions on acceptance, builder liability, plot description, and price revision. The criminal court in Coutances imposed a daily fine of approximately €1,520 for each contract concluded or offered in non-compliance with the removal order.

Contracts No Longer Offered Can Still Be Challenged

One of the most commercially significant features of the clause removal action is that the courts can act on contracts that the business has already stopped offering to new customers — provided those contracts are still in force with existing customers. A business that has updated its standard terms prospectively but left existing contracts unmodified remains exposed to an action targeting the old terms (Cass. 1re civ., 26 September 2019, n° 18-10.890 and n° 18-10.891; TJ Paris, 9 June 2020, n° 16-09799). The only way to close this window is to terminate or amend the old contracts with existing customers — not just update the standard form.

How the Action Is Initiated

The clause removal action under Arts. L 621-7 and L 621-8 is a pure civil action and can be brought on its own initiative by an approved consumer association, independently of any other proceedings. Three points that frequently surprise businesses:

  • No consumer complaint is required. The action can be introduced in the complete absence of any harm suffered by consumers or any complaint from them (CA Paris, 2 October 1998). An association can challenge a clause solely on the basis of its legal analysis of the contract.
  • No prior negotiation is required. Nothing obliges an approved association to negotiate the conditions for clause removal before bringing court proceedings (CA Paris, 7 May 1998). It can go directly to the court.
  • It can be brought by initial application or by intervening as a principal in existing proceedings. The action can be introduced as a stand-alone claim (CPC Art. 53) or by intervening as a principal party in proceedings that have already started (CPC Art. 329) — not to support a consumer's claim, but to obtain clause removal from a standard contract (Cass. 1re civ., 6 January 1994).

The Remedies: A Three-Step Escalation

1
Suppression of the Clause The court orders the removal of the clause from the contract or type of contract. This may be accompanied by an astreinte (daily fine) for non-compliance.
2
«Deemed Non-Written» in All Identical Contracts in Force The court declares the clause deemed non-written in all identical contracts concluded by the same professional with consumers. This wipes the clause from the entire existing customer portfolio, not just future contracts.
3
Consumer Notification at the Business's Expense The court orders the professional to inform all affected consumers by all appropriate means, at their own expense. This triggers a notification campaign — letter, email, website, or press — at the business's cost.

Damages on Top of Clause Removal

The clause removal action does not preclude a simultaneous or subsequent claim for damages to compensate the collective interest harm (Cass. 1re civ., 5 October 1999; Cass. 1re civ., 26 April 2017, n° 15-18.970 F-PB). Even where the demand for clause removal is rejected — because all identical contracts have already been terminated — the association can still pursue a separate damages claim for the collective harm caused by those clauses while they were in force (Cass. 1re civ., 26 September 2019, n° 18-10.890 and n° 18-10.891).

Procedural Rules for the Clause Removal Action

Clause by Clause: No Wholesale Nullification

The clause removal action does not permit the court to declare an entire set of standard terms void or to invalidate an entire contractual document. The demand must be formulated clause by clause: each individual provision to be removed must be specifically identified and challenged on its own merits (TJ Paris, 9 June 2020, n° 16-09799). This requirement is operationally significant for associations, which must invest in detailed contractual analysis; it is also a protection for businesses, which know that a court cannot annihilate an entire CGV in a single order.

The Summary Judge (Juge des Référés) Is Available

Cessation of unlawful practices and clause removal can be ordered by the summary judge on an urgent application (Cass. 1re civ., 1 December 1987, Bull. civ. I n° 320; Cass. 1re civ., 9 March 2004, n° 438). This means that in urgent cases — where, for example, a clause is being actively used in a way that is causing immediate harm — an association can obtain an injunction without waiting for the full trial process. The prospect of a référé injunction is a significant lever in pre-litigation negotiations.

The Public Prosecutor's Investigation Reports

In any proceedings — civil or criminal — the public prosecutor may produce before the court any inspection reports or enquiry documents in their possession that are useful to the resolution of the dispute (Art. L 621-10). In practice, DGCCRF inspection reports on contract terms can be placed before the court in this way, providing an additional evidentiary foundation for an association's claim.

Damages Even When Clause Removal Is Rejected

A distinct feature of French consumer association clause litigation is that the damages action and the clause removal action are legally independent. Even where the court dismisses the clause removal demand — because the clauses in question are no longer contained in any contract currently in force — the association can still claim and obtain damages for the collective interest harm caused by those clauses during the period they were active (Cass. 1re civ., 26 September 2019, n° 18-10.890 and n° 18-10.891).

This separation means that a business that has already cleaned up its contract terms faces two distinct residual risks: a clause removal demand for any in-force contracts still containing the old terms, and a damages claim for the harm the old terms caused while they were in use.

The Limit: EU-Derived Law Only for the Civil Route

The standalone civil clause removal action under Art. L 621-7 is firmly anchored to the list of EU directives and certain EU regulations transposed into French consumer law. A Cour de cassation ruling confirmed that an action based on a purely national insurance obligation — the requirement for building owners to take out construction damage insurance — was inadmissible under Art. L 621-7 because it did not invoke either a criminal offence or a provision transposing EU law (Cass. 1re civ., 30 March 2022, n° 21-13.970 FS-B). For clause challenges based on purely national law (outside EU transposition), the association must instead rely on the criminal route under Art. L 621-2.

Practical Points for Businesses Reviewing Their Standard Terms
The civil clause removal action (Arts. L 621-7/8) does not require any consumer complaint or prior litigation — approved associations can and do conduct autonomous audits of consumer-facing contract terms and bring actions based on their findings alone.
Updating your standard terms for new contracts is not enough: any old clauses that may have been unfair remain challengeable as long as any contract containing them is still in force. The only exit from this exposure is to amend or terminate those existing contracts.
The co-ownership syndicate exclusion (Cass. 2014) is narrow: a contract with a non-professional legal entity is outside the action's scope, but any contract with an individual consumer remains within it.
The clause-by-clause requirement protects against wholesale annihilation of your CGV, but requires associations to invest in detailed analysis. Budget for the possibility that an association conducts a systematic clause-by-clause audit of your terms.
The "deemed non-written in all identical contracts in force" effect (Art. L 621-8, al. 2) has a portfolio-wide impact: a successful challenge to a clause in one standard form can simultaneously void that clause in thousands of existing customer agreements.
Damages for collective harm remain available even after clause removal is refused, and the quantum assessment takes into account the association's own costs in pursuing the action — meaning that even a partial success can generate a meaningful damages award.
The juge des référés can issue urgent clause removal injunctions — businesses must be prepared to respond quickly if an association targets a clause that is being actively deployed in consumer transactions.
For digital platforms and subscription services: the TJ Paris 2020 ruling illustrates that GDPR compliance, copyright issues, and distance-selling directive obligations can all be swept into a single clause removal action — and that users in their capacity as data subjects can be the basis for association standing, not just users as purchasers.
Reviewing Your Consumer Contracts for Association Risk?

French consumer associations have the tools, the expertise, and the legal standing to challenge unfair or unlawful contract terms without waiting for any consumer to complain. A proactive compliance audit of standard consumer-facing terms — particularly standard form contracts, digital platform terms, and financial services agreements — is the most effective way to reduce exposure before an association acts.

Book a Consultation

This article is for general information and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. The information reflects the state of the law as updated to April 2024 in the source text, including the 2019 and 2022 Cour de cassation rulings. Always seek qualified legal advice for your specific situation.