Translation is part of service, not an afterthought
When a French writ of summons (assignation) — whether on the merits or in summary proceedings (référé) — or a French judgment has to be served on a company based in London, New York or Sydney, the translation is no mere formality. It often determines whether the request for service will be accepted at all and, in practice, whether the procedural timetable holds. For litigators and in-house counsel, two questions arise from the outset: which instrument governs transmission, and in what language does the receiving State require the document?
EU Regulation or Hague Convention?
Between EU Member States (Denmark being subject to special arrangements), service is governed by Regulation (EU) 2020/1784, which has applied since 1 July 2022. The addressee may refuse the document, either at the time of service or within two weeks, if it is written neither in a language they understand nor in an official language of the place of service. For an Irish or Maltese company, an English translation removes that risk.
The United Kingdom has been outside that Regulation since the end of the Brexit transition period on 31 December 2020; under Article 68 of the Withdrawal Agreement, only documents received for service before that date remained within its scope. French documents are now served in the UK under the Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, to which the United States, Canada, Australia, India and Singapore are also parties. The up-to-date list of Contracting Parties and their declarations is available in the HCCH status table for the Convention.
The role of the commissaire de justice
On the French side, the request is normally sent by the commissaire de justice (the French judicial officer, formerly huissier de justice) to the Central Authority of the State addressed, using the model form annexed to the Convention: the request itself, the summary of the document to be served, and the certificate that the Central Authority completes and returns once service has been effected. The Central Authority then has the document served by a method prescribed by its own domestic law.
Unless the State of destination objects, the Convention also allows more direct channels, such as postal service or service through judicial officers or other competent persons in that State. These routes do not make the language question go away: the defendant must be in a position to understand the claim brought against it.
What the UK and the US require
- United Kingdom: for England and Wales, the Central Authority is the Senior Master of the Royal Courts of Justice (Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own authorities). The UK requires documents to be written in, or translated into, English. Companies are served by post at their registered office.
- United States: the Central Authority is the Office of International Judicial Assistance within the US Department of Justice, which outsources requests directed at private parties to a contractor, ABC Legal Services. Formal requests must be accompanied by an English translation of the documents to be served and a complete translation of the model form. The US authority states that service is completed within 30 business days of receipt, or within 7 business days where expedited service is specifically requested. Informal channels carry no equivalent translation requirement, but the US country page on the HCCH website warns that some courts may decline to give effect to untranslated informal service.
Summary proceedings: the translation is often on the critical path
The chain is a long one: translation, transmission, execution by the foreign authority, return of the certificate. Yet the Convention bars the court from giving judgment against a defendant who has not appeared until it is established that the document was served or delivered in sufficient time to enable the defendant to defend — while still allowing provisional or protective measures in urgent cases. Furthermore, before a court sitting in metropolitan France, the time limits for appearance are extended by two months for persons residing abroad (Article 643 of the French Code of Civil Procedure), as explained, along with other time-limit rules, on the French page of the European e-Justice Portal.
In practice: send the draft writ for translation as soon as its wording is settled, even before the hearing date is fixed, and have the exhibits translated in parallel. Last-minute amendments can then be carried over quickly into the translation instead of holding up the whole process.
A mirror translation, exhibits included
A translated writ should read side by side with the original: same structure, same paragraph numbering, same headings, the operative part (« PAR CES MOTIFS ») rendered in full, and exhibit references consistent with the list of exhibits. French institutions with no exact counterpart (tribunal judiciaire, juge des référés, astreinte, commissaire de justice) are kept in French with an English gloss rather than replaced by a misleading foreign concept. This allows opposing counsel and the court alike to work from both versions without ambiguity.
I translate directly from the original, as a certified translation of legal and court documents bearing my seal and signature as a sworn judicial expert. The 1965 Convention does not in itself require a sworn translation, but a certified translation forestalls any challenge to its accuracy.
British or American English?
The translation follows the usage of the receiving jurisdiction. The party bringing the claim is the claimant in England but the plaintiff in the United States; written pleadings become submissions on one side and a brief on the other; and a French avocat is neither a solicitor in New York nor an attorney in London — lawyer, or the French title retained, is the safer choice. Spelling and layout follow the same logic.
Serving a judgment with a view to enforcement
Serving a French judgment on a foreign company follows the same channels. If enforcement is then contemplated, the translation will often have to be produced again before the foreign court. Between the EU and the UK, the Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments has applied since 1 July 2025 to proceedings commenced on or after that date; it provides that documents not in an official language of the requested State must be accompanied by a certified translation, unless that State's law provides otherwise. In the United States, recognition is a matter of state law. For law firms and legal departments that handle such matters regularly, see also my page for legal professionals.
Frequently asked questions
Do all the exhibits need to be translated?
That depends on the State of destination and on litigation strategy. For the United States, the documents accompanying the request must be translated; elsewhere, the decision is made with the commissaire de justice. Exhibits already in English obviously need no translation.
Can you work from a draft?
Yes — in summary proceedings it is actually recommended. Ideally, send me the Word file: later amendments are carried over into the translation before the final version is certified.
How much time should I allow?
Turnaround depends on the length of the writ and the volume of exhibits. Get in touch as soon as proceedings are contemplated, with the target hearing date, and we will agree on a workable schedule.
Are documents handled confidentially?
Yes. All pleadings and exhibits entrusted to me are handled in strict confidence.