You are used to lawyers who work on a contingency fee, or on a « no win, no fee » basis. You now need a lawyer in France, and the first French lawyer you contact asks for a signed fee agreement and a payment on account before doing anything. You wonder whether you are dealing with an expensive lawyer, or with a different system.
It is a different system. French law forbids a lawyer’s fee based solely on the outcome of the case. It allows a success fee, but only on top of a fee for the work done. That rule shapes everything else: the fee agreement, the payment on account, the role of the success fee and what you recover from the other side if you win.
This article explains how French lawyers are paid, and how that compares with the US contingency fee and with the CFA and DBA of England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own rules and are not covered.
Can a French lawyer work on a no win, no fee basis? The short answer
No, a French lawyer cannot work on a no win, no fee basis. A fee fixed solely by reference to the result of the case is prohibited (art. 10 of Law No. 71-1130 of 31 December 1971). A success fee is lawful only in addition to a fee paid for the work done, and it can only be agreed before the result is obtained (Cass. 2e civ., 21 April 2022, n° 20-18.826). The fee agreement itself must, in principle, be in writing (same article 10).
The text
« Toute fixation d’honoraires qui ne le serait qu’en fonction du résultat judiciaire est interdite. Est licite la convention qui, outre la rémunération des prestations effectuées, prévoit la fixation d’un honoraire complémentaire en fonction du résultat obtenu ou du service rendu. »
Article 10 of Law No. 71-1130 of 31 December 1971 (extract)
In English: a fee depending only on the outcome is forbidden. A success fee is allowed as a supplement to payment for the work, by reference to the result obtained or the service rendered.
A common mistake is to think that the reform of 2015 (Law No. 2015-990 of 6 August 2015) opened pure contingency fees in some cases, such as personal injury. It did not. The reform made the written fee agreement compulsory; the prohibition of a fee based solely on the result remains in the text, without exception.
What a client pays a French lawyer
A written fee agreement
The fee agreement (convention d’honoraires) is compulsory, subject to limited statutory exceptions, including urgency, force majeure and full legal aid (art. 10 of Law No. 71-1130). It states the fee method, the amount or how it is calculated, and the expected costs. A client who receives a proposal of this kind before any work begins is dealing with a lawyer who complies with the law.
The absence of a written agreement does not mean the work is free. The Cour de cassation has held that a lawyer who did not sign a fee agreement keeps the right to be paid for the work done, the fee then being set according to the statutory criteria (Cass. 2e civ., 14 June 2018, n° 17-19.709).
An hourly rate or a fixed fee
The fee for the work is usually an hourly rate, or a fixed fee for a defined task. The law lists the criteria that fees take into account, according to custom: the client’s financial situation, the difficulty of the case, the costs incurred, the lawyer’s reputation and the work done (art. 10 of Law No. 71-1130).
For clients who are consumers, an hourly rate is not enough on its own. The lawyer must give information before the contract that allows the client to assess, at least roughly, the likely overall cost; otherwise the clause may be held unfair (CJEU, 12 January 2023, D.V. v M.A., C-395/21).
A payment on account
French lawyers usually ask for a payment on account (provision) before starting. It is set against the fees as they are incurred. It is comparable to the advance fee deposit commonly requested by US lawyers.
A success fee, only as a supplement
The success fee (honoraire de résultat) is calculated by reference to the result obtained or the service rendered (art. 10 of Law No. 71-1130). In practice, it is often a percentage of the amount recovered or saved, but another formula can be agreed. It must be agreed before the result is obtained, even if work has already started (Cass. 2e civ., 21 April 2022, n° 20-18.826).
Article 10 sets no maximum percentage. That does not validate every split between fixed fee and success fee. Where the fee for the work is manifestly derisory compared with the success fee, the agreement is treated as a prohibited fee based solely on the result (Cass. 2e civ., 10 November 2021, n° 19-26.183).
France has no statutory cap on the success fee, but a token fixed fee does not turn a pure contingency fee into a lawful one.
The detailed rules are set out, in French, in an article on l’honoraire de résultat de l’avocat.
When the success fee becomes payable
The agreement defines the result that triggers the success fee: a final judgment, a settlement, a payment actually received. In the 2022 case, the fee agreement was signed before the settlement, when the result was not yet achieved, and the success fee became due once the dispute was ended by an irrevocable act (Cass. 2e civ., 21 April 2022, n° 20-18.826). A well-drafted agreement states whether the fee is due on judgment, on settlement or on payment.
VAT depends on who the client is and where they are established
For a private client receiving ordinary legal advice or litigation services, a French lawyer charges 20% VAT to clients living in France or elsewhere in the European Union (art. 259, 2° French Tax Code). Private clients living outside the European Union are not charged French VAT on these services (art. 259 B French Tax Code). What counts is the client’s usual residence, not nationality.
A business client registered for VAT follows a different rule: the service is taxed where that business is established (art. 259, 1° French Tax Code). These provisions move to the French Code on taxes on goods and services (Code des impositions sur les biens et services) on 1 January 2027, when VAT is recodified; the article numbers cited here will change on that date.
What is not included in the fee
Court costs, expert fees and enforcement officer fees (commissaire de justice) are usually charged on top. So are the fees of local counsel where French territorial rules require separate representation before a court outside the lawyer’s area: a French lawyer may plead anywhere in France, but representation in writing (postulation) is in principle limited to the courts within the lawyer’s court of appeal area (art. 5 of Law No. 71-1130). The full list of extras is set out, in French, in an article on ce qui n’est pas compris dans les honoraires d’avocat.
Who pays the legal costs in France? Partial cost shifting
French law sits between the American and the English rules. The losing party pays the court costs in the strict sense (dépens), such as enforcement officer and expert fees (arts 695 and 696 French Code of Civil Procedure). For lawyers’ fees, the judge may order the loser to pay the winner a sum it sets itself, taking into account fairness or the financial situation of the losing party (art. 700 French Code of Civil Procedure). The parties may produce evidence of the sums they claim (same article). The equivalent in criminal cases, for the civil party, is art. 475-1 French Code of Criminal Procedure.
The award under article 700 is not an automatic, euro-for-euro reimbursement of the fees actually paid. A French claimant should budget for their own lawyer and treat any award as a contribution.
A French lawyer’s fee is the price of the work. The success fee is the share in the result.
The United States: contingency fees and the American rule
The contingency fee
In the United States, a lawyer’s fee may be contingent on recovery, so that no legal fee is due if the claim fails. The client may nevertheless remain liable for litigation expenses, depending on the agreement and the applicable state rules. The agreement must be in writing, signed by the client, and state the percentage for settlement, trial and appeal, how expenses are deducted, and which expenses the client must pay whether or not the client prevails (ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.5(c)).
A contingency fee is prohibited for the defence in a criminal case. In domestic relations matters, it is prohibited where payment depends on securing a divorce or on the amount of alimony, support or property settlement (Rule 1.5(d)).
The ABA Model Rules are a model: each state adopts its own rules of professional conduct. The applicable rule is that of the state where the lawyer practises.
The American rule on costs
Each party generally pays its own lawyer, win or lose, unless a statute or a contract provides otherwise (Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness Society, 421 U.S. 240 (1975)). Under a contingency fee, a claimant without funds can still bring a case, since the lawyer is paid out of the recovery.
England and Wales: CFA, DBA, QOCS and ATE insurance
The CFA, or conditional fee agreement
A CFA makes some or all of the lawyer’s fees conditional on success. It may operate on a « no win, no fee » or a « no win, low fee » basis (Explanatory Notes to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012). If the case is won, the client pays the base fees and a success fee, capped at 100% of the base fees (Conditional Fee Agreements Order 2013).
In personal injury claims at first instance, the success fee is also capped at 25% of certain damages, essentially general damages and past losses, excluding future losses (same Order). Since 1 April 2013, the success fee can no longer be recovered from the losing party (Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, s. 44). The client pays it out of the damages.
The DBA, or damages-based agreement
Under a DBA, the lawyer takes a percentage of the damages recovered, and nothing if the case is lost. The percentage, VAT included, is capped at 25% in personal injury cases, 35% in employment cases and 50% in other cases, with detailed rules on which sums count towards the cap (Damages-Based Agreements Regulations 2013). The DBA is the closest English equivalent of the American contingency fee.
Adverse costs, QOCS and ATE insurance
In England and Wales, the general rule is that the unsuccessful party pays the successful party’s costs, subject to the court’s discretion (Civil Procedure Rules, r. 44.2(2)(a)). A claimant on a CFA or a DBA therefore still risks paying the other side’s costs if the case fails.
Personal injury claims are the main exception. Under qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS), an unsuccessful personal injury claimant is normally protected against paying the defendant’s costs, subject to exceptions such as fundamental dishonesty or the striking out of the claim (Civil Procedure Rules, r. 44.13 to 44.16).
Outside that protection, after the event (ATE) insurance covers the risk of adverse costs. Since the 2013 reforms, its premium is generally no longer recoverable from the losing party, subject to limited exceptions, in particular for premiums covering expert reports in clinical negligence claims (Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, s. 46).
Under a CFA or a DBA, the English lawyer may take on part of the outcome risk. A French lawyer cannot make the whole fee depend on the outcome.
Third-party litigation funding in France
A funder may finance a case in exchange for a share of the proceeds. France has no comprehensive statutory regime governing third-party litigation funding. The Paris Bar Council has expressly accepted its use in international arbitration, in a resolution of 21 February 2017, recalling that the lawyer’s professional duties remain owed exclusively to the client, not to the funder.
The three systems side by side
| France | United States | England and Wales | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fee solely on success | Prohibited | Allowed (contingency fee), subject to state rules | Allowed (DBA) |
| Success fee on top of fees | Allowed, agreed before the result | Possible | Allowed (CFA, up to 100% of base fees) |
| Written agreement | Compulsory in principle | Compulsory for contingency fees | Compulsory for CFA and DBA |
| Loser pays winner’s lawyer | Partly, at the judge’s discretion (art. 700) | Generally not | Generally yes, subject to court discretion and QOCS |
| Insurance against adverse costs | Not structurally equivalent to ATE | Rarely relevant | ATE insurance |
Cross-border cases: two lawyers, two payment models
In a dispute with both an English and a French side, the client may pay each lawyer differently. An English solicitor may act on a CFA against a bank or a regulated adviser in England. The French lawyer, acting in the French insolvency proceedings or criminal case, will work on a fee agreement with a payment on account. Investors in the Halcyon Retreat scheme are in exactly that position, as explained in an article on Halcyon claims in England and in France.
Two traps deserve attention. The first is the claims intermediary who is not a lawyer and offers to handle a French claim. Giving legal advice or drafting private legal documents for others, on a regular and paid basis, is regulated in France: only the persons and professions authorised by articles 54 to 66 of Law No. 71-1130 may do so, within their respective limits. The question is not how the intermediary is paid, but what it actually does and whether it is authorised to do it.
The second is the fee dispute. In France, disputes over a lawyer’s fees go to the bâtonnier (the head of the lawyer’s local Bar), then, on appeal within one month, to the first president of the court of appeal (arts 174 to 176 of Decree No. 91-1197 of 27 November 1991). The procedure is explained, in French, in an article on la taxation des honoraires de l’avocat.
Suing in France: a Practical Guide for Foreign Claimants
Your case, not the general rule
The right fee structure depends on what is at stake, on who the other party is, and on what can realistically be recovered. A fee agreement is not a formality: it is the first decision in the case. The facts count as much as the law, and that is where a lawyer’s work begins.
Valentin Simonnet is a member of the Paris Bar (avocat au Barreau de Paris). He practises in business litigation and white-collar criminal defence.
