Partial Cassation of a Committal Order: What Consequences for Non-Appealing Defendants?

Imagine: you are a property owner in Vertou, and your neighbour, with whom you share a party wall, is accused of a serious offence. The case is committed to the Crown Court. But then one of the co-accused, a property developer from Nantes, obtains the cassation of the committal order. What happens to you? Does the procedure start from scratch? And above all, what evidence will the jury be able to examine?

The question is more complex than it seems. In criminal law, the order of the examining chamber committing defendants to the Crown Court is a key document: it lists the charges and the evidence in the file. If this order is quashed for one defendant, but not for the others, the situation becomes delicate. On 25 June 1986, the Court of Cassation ruled: during the trial, the original order AND the new committal order must be read in full, even if the latter annuls certain evidence. A decision that protects the rights of non-appealing defendants, but may be disconcerting.

For property owners, tenants or real estate professionals involved in criminal proceedings (e.g., for rental fraud or fraudulent sale), this decision reminds us that procedural rules are strict. A simple procedural defect can change everything. So, how to navigate it? Analysis.

The Facts: A Story Like Many Others

The case begins in Bordeaux, but it could have happened in Nantes or Vertou. Several individuals are charged with serious offences: drug trafficking, complicity, criminal association. The examining chamber of the Bordeaux Court of Appeal issues a committal order to the Gironde Crown Court. Among the defendants, a certain Y... decides to appeal to the Court of Cassation. His appeal is admitted, and the examining chamber's order is quashed. The Court of Cassation remands the case to another examining chamber, that of the Poitiers Court of Appeal (by a procedural twist, it will ultimately be the Bordeaux examining chamber, but with different judges).

This new examining chamber issues a second committal order, which annuls certain evidence from the original proceedings (e.g., wiretaps). But note: the other defendants, who did not appeal, are definitively bound by the first committal order. The question then arises: during the trial before the Crown Court, should the first order (which was not quashed for the others) or the second order (which annuls evidence) be read?

The Bordeaux Crown Court initially chose to read only the second order, considering that the first had become void. But the Court of Cassation censures this practice. It requires the reading of both orders, so that the court and the jury can be aware of the entire proceedings, including the annulled evidence — but knowing that it can no longer be used. A procedural puzzle illustrating the complexity of partial remands.

The Reasoning of the Court — Explained

The Court of Cassation relies on a fundamental principle: the authority of res judicata. Article 567 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (which governs appeals to the Court of Cassation) provides that the decision of the examining chamber becomes final with respect to defendants who did not exercise their right of appeal. In this case, the other defendants had not appealed: the first committal order was therefore final as to them.

But then why read the second order? Because the partial cassation created a hybrid situation. For defendant Y..., the first order is annulled and replaced by the second. For the others, the first order remains valid. The Crown Court must therefore read the first order (because it constitutes the committal title for the non-appealing defendants) and the second order (because it is the committal title for Y... and annuls certain evidence).

The Court specifies that this double reading is mandatory "even if the committal order of the examining chamber has pronounced the annulment of evidence mentioned in the order of the initially seised examining chamber." In other words, even if the second order annuls evidence, the first order which mentions that evidence must still be read. The jury is thus informed that the evidence exists but cannot be used. A pragmatic solution that avoids rendering the first order meaningless while respecting the annulment decision.

This decision confirms consistent case law: the Court of Cassation ensures that the rights of the defence are preserved, even in the case of partial cassation. It reminds us that criminal procedure does not tolerate shortcuts: each step must be strictly followed, on pain of nullity.

What This Changes for You — Practically

If you are a property owner in Nantes and involved in criminal proceedings (e.g., for renting out an insanitary dwelling), this decision has practical consequences. First, it underscores the importance of not neglecting an appeal to the Court of Cassation. If you are a co-defendant, your fate may depend on the one who appeals. But if you do not appeal, you will be bound by the initial order, even if it is quashed for another.

Second, for real estate professionals (agents, developers), this decision reminds us that procedural nullities are not automatically extended to all defendants. If evidence is annulled for one, it may remain valid for others. Defence strategies must therefore be anticipated: do not rely on a nullity obtained by a co-defendant to gain an advantage.

Finally, for tenants who are victims of an offence (e.g., deposit fraud), this decision shows that proceedings can be long and complex. If the case is committed to the Crown Court, the investigating judge is not the sole decision-maker: the examining chamber plays a key role. And if only one defendant obtains a cassation, expect multiple readings of orders during the trial. Nothing like it to sow confusion.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Systematically check appeal deadlines: In criminal matters, the deadline to appeal to the Court of Cassation is five clear days after notification of the order (Article 568 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). Do not let this window pass if you believe your rights are violated.
• Consult a lawyer as soon as you are charged: Procedural nullities must be raised before any discussion on the merits. A lawyer specialised in real estate criminal law can identify defects (unlawful wiretaps, abusive searches) and challenge them before the examining chamber.
• Do not rely on solidarity among co-defendants: If there are several of you in the same case, each defendant has their own interests. An appeal filed by one does not automatically benefit the others. Be proactive.
• Document all stages of the proceedings: Keep copies of orders, notifications, and correspondence. If in doubt about the reading of orders in the Crown Court, your lawyer can request explanations and, if necessary, file an appeal.

Further Reading: Related Case Law and Developments

This decision is part of a line of judgments that guarantee respect for the rights of the defence in cases of partial cassation. One can cite the judgment of the Criminal Chamber of 12 January 1970 (Bull. crim. no. 21), which already established the principle of res judicata with respect to non-appealing defendants. More recently, the Court of Cassation recalled (Crim., 8 March 2017, no. 16-85.742) that the cassation of a committal order cannot affect rights acquired by other defendants.

The trend is therefore towards the protection of individual rights, even at the cost of procedural complexity. For litigants, this means being extremely vigilant about procedural acts. A simple omission to read an order can lead to a nullity of the trial. In the future, the Court of Cassation can be expected to continue to clarify the modalities of this double reading, particularly in the event of annulment of essential evidence.

What You Absolutely Must Remember

FAQ:

• What happens if I am accused with others and one of them obtains the cassation of the committal order? Your committal order remains valid if you did not appeal. At trial, the court must read both orders: yours and that of your co-defendant.
• Can I benefit from the nullity of evidence obtained by a co-defendant? No, in principle. The nullity is pronounced only in the interest of the person who raised it. The other defendants remain bound by the evidence not annulled.
• What are the deadlines to appeal to the Court of Cassation? Five clear days from notification of the examining chamber's order. After this deadline, the decision becomes final.
• Does this decision apply in correctional matters? The issue does not arise in the same way, because Crown Courts are solely competent for crimes. But the principle of res judicata applies to all jurisdictions.
• What if the Crown Court refuses to read one of the orders? This is a ground for nullity. Your lawyer must raise the incident before the opening of the trial, and if necessary, file an appeal.

Are you in a similar situation? A first 30-minute consultation with Maître Zakine (£45) can save you months of proceedings — and often much more. Book an appointment →