Electronic service of judicial officers' documents

Electronic Significance

Bailiffs are not (anymore?) the dusty characters described in popular imagery. On the contrary, they are, for the most part, at the cutting edge of modernity. Electronic service of documents, an essential tool for judicial officers living in the 21st century, is one of the tools they use on a daily basis. The episode of confinement at the beginning of the year 2020 made it possible to justify the interest for this mode of service.

Electronic service: what the law says

Decree 2012-366 of 15 March 2012 opened the way to electronic service, in accordance with the provisions of the Béteille Act of 22 December 2010. Indeed, since 2012, bailiffs can carry out electronic service. This is a "normal" evolution of the profession since electronic service of documents has been implemented at the highest level of the judicial hierarchy for several years.
The judicial officers of the Court of Cassation proceed to the electronic service of the acts of the Court of Cassation, thanks to a decree of 17 June 2008. Thus the first electronic service took place in December 2009, and it is today more than 95% of the civil briefs that are served by this means.
With the decree of 15 March 2012, it is the service of documents to the litigant that is made possible by electronic means. This mode of service, far from being a comfort for the judicial officers, requires technical and legal prerequisites. It also entails consequences for the litigant, and in particular requires a demonstration of his willingness to accept this mode of electronic service.

Electronic service: a normal evolution of service by bailiffs

Past minds might regret the very existence of electronic significance. We imagine that they are the same ones who regretted the advent of computerization of offices, the Internet, e-mail, blockchain...
To reassure them, it should be recalled that the introduction of electronic service does not imply the end of paper service, since the two modes of service coexist, as the new wording of article 653 of the Code of Civil Procedure explains: "service is made on paper or by electronic means". It does not imply either the disappearance of the judicial officer.

However, with the electronic service of documents, certain practical arrangements for bailiffs have been modified. The decree eliminates the formality of the double original, in favour of a single original, kept in the minutes, and a certified shipment. Similarly, "the original and the dispatch may be drawn up on different media", states the new wording of article 24 of the decree of 29 February 1956.

Thus, the original can be kept by the judicial officer on paper, and the dispatch sent by electronic means (electronic service of documents), but the reverse is also possible, allowing judicial officers to dematerialise all their minutes.

In most cases, the rules of territorial jurisdiction remain unchanged.

Where a procedural document must be served on a party, only a bailiff within the jurisdiction of the court of appeal of the person served may serve a document on him. Thus, our office can serve a writ of summons for example in Paris, Nanterre or Versailles, but not in Nîmes or Valence.
There is only one exception: when a bailiff has to seize a bank account, the competent bailiff is not the one at the address of the registered office of the third party seized, but the one at the domicile of the seized debtor.
Of course, there is an exception for debtors living abroad.

Are we going to see the disappearance of the paper medium in favour of electronic service?

La signification électronique est massivement utilisée par les huissiers de Justice pour un certain nombre d’actes, notamment à destination des services de l’état (interrogation de fichiers, saisies par déclaration en préfecture) ou des banques.
Ce sont en effet chaque année plusieurs centaines de milliers d’actes qui sont signifiés de façon électronique aux services sus-mentionnés.
Cependant, la signification électronique n’est qu’un mode de signification et il est indiscutable que la signification « classique » ou « papier » ne doit pas (et n’a pas vocation à) être remplacée par les significations électroniques. Au contraire, c’est bien le principe même de la mixité des deux modes de signification qui permet d’assurer la signification la plus adéquate. Par ailleurs, seules les signification civiles sont aujourd’hui possibles par ce biais de signification.

Moreover, electronic service of documents cannot, fortunately, be imposed on the litigant, and it is therefore on the basis of a voluntary approach on his part that service can be made to him by dematerialised means. Indeed, it is up to the litigant to communicate his consent to be an addressee of the acts of judicial officers by electronic means. This consent can be revoked at any time.

Enfin, et ce n’est pas de la moindre importance, aucun surcoût, ni pour le demandeur ni pour le signifié, n’impacte la signification électronique dont le coût est strictement le même qu’une signification « classique ».

How to give consent to electronic service?

This voluntary step of the litigant at the reception of the acts of judicial officers is possible directly at any judicial officer's office.

There is also an online solution, since  the Delivract network of judicial officers (a network for the service of documents throughout France) has created the only platform for registering consents. This solution makes it possible, from home, from your computer or from your smartphone, to easily give your consent to receive judicial officers' documents electronically.
Electronic Significance

This consent is based on the one hand on the digital identity created by IDCert, the service of the National Chamber of Commissioners of Justice (Bailiffs), and on the other hand on the SECURACT digital safe of the said chamber.

Our study is at your disposal to answer your questions.