Background
In an October 20, 2022 criminal judgment, the specially constituted Paris Assize Court, sitting on appeal in a terrorism-related prosecution, convicted six defendants of offenses including terrorist criminal association, ordinary criminal association, complicity in murder and attempted murder, aggravated theft and confinement, weapons offenses, aggravated violence and possession of incendiary or explosive substances.
The ensuing appeal concerned civil interests. On March 4, 2024, the assize court ruled on the admissibility and merits of various civil-party applications, declared the defendants jointly and severally liable for damage caused by the crimes, and referred the matter to the competent court for assessment of the losses. The defendants sought review, arguing that Article 706-16-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reserved compensation claims arising from acts of terrorism to the civil courts.
The Court’s Holding
The Criminal Chamber held that a specially constituted assize court hearing a terrorism case generally has no authority to decide the admissibility of compensation claims, determine civil liability or prescribe joint and several liability. When damages are requested, it must confine itself to transferring those claims to the competent civil court. That rule also applies when the civil claims target defendants convicted only of ordinary offenses connected to the terrorist offenses and prosecuted in the same joined proceedings.
The assize court may rule incidentally on a contested civil-party application when the application serves to initiate or support the public prosecution and its admissibility is challenged during the criminal phase. Here, however, admissibility had not been contested during those proceedings. By nevertheless classifying the civil-party applications and declaring the defendants jointly and severally liable, the assize court exceeded its powers.
The Court of Cassation therefore struck only those portions of the March 4, 2024 judgment addressing the admissibility or merits of the civil-party applications and imposing civil and joint liability. It ordered no remand, preserved the judgment’s other provisions, extended the partial cassation to three non-appealing convicted persons, and directed the assize court clerk to transmit the damages claims to the competent civil court.
Key Takeaways
- Compensation claims for harm caused by terrorist acts belong exclusively before the competent civil court under Article 706-16-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- The jurisdictional rule covers defendants convicted of connected ordinary crimes when their prosecution was joined with the terrorism case.
- A terrorism assize court may address civil-party standing only when participation in support of the public prosecution is contested during the criminal phase; it may not use the civil judgment to determine compensatory liability.
Why It Matters
The decision clarifies the separation between criminal participation and compensation in French terrorism proceedings. Recognition as a civil party for purposes of supporting the prosecution does not itself establish victim status, entitlement to compensation or the defendant’s civil liability before the civil court.
For victims and counsel, the ruling centralizes adjudication of damages in the civil courts even when some defendants were convicted only of connected non-terrorist offenses. For criminal courts, it sharply limits the civil judgment to transferring compensation demands rather than deciding their admissibility, merits or allocation.