Judicial Change of Venue: A Case Remitted Near the Witnesses (63)

Imagine: you own a building in La Motte-Servolex and a dispute arises with your tenant. The case is heard in Chambéry, just a few kilometres away. But what would happen if, for reasons of impartiality or convenience, the court had to be changed? This is exactly what Article 696 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CPP) provides, as illustrated by this 1991 judgment of the Court of Cassation.

The question every litigant asks: "Can I request the transfer of my case to another court?" The answer is yes, but under certain conditions. This decision shows how the Court of Cassation can move a case from one end of France to another, for example from Moulins to Lille, when the distance of witnesses, experts or judicial police officers justifies it.

What few people know is that this mechanism, called "judicial change of venue", can also apply in civil matters by analogy. But in this case, it is a criminal matter. Let us decipher this decision and its implications for you, owners, tenants or real estate professionals.

The facts: a story like any other

The case began with proceedings brought before the Tribunal de Grande Instance (TGI) of Moulins, in the Allier. The alleged acts were committed in that region, but most of the witnesses, experts and judicial police officers (OPJ) reside in Lille, in the Nord. The Public Prosecutor's Office and the parties considered that the geographical distance made the hearing of these persons difficult and costly. They therefore requested the transfer of the case to the TGI of Lille, closer to where these key players were located.

Mr. X, an owner in La Motte-Servolex, could find himself in a similar situation: if his case is heard in Chambéry but the witnesses live in Lyon, he could request a transfer. In our judgment, the Court of Cassation was seized directly because the request for transfer occurred during the proceedings. The court in Moulins considered that it could not itself rule on this change, hence the referral to the high court.

In other words, the parties are not merely asking for a simple change of courtroom: they want the case to be transferred to another city, or even another region. The Court of Cassation accepts and refers the case to the TGI of Lille, "for the reasons set out above", i.e., for the reasons explained. This decision was rendered on 13 February 1991 (number 91-80.612).

The reasoning of the court — explained

The Court of Cassation bases its decision on Article 696, paragraph 2, of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In short, this provision states that the Court of Cassation may, at the request of the Public Prosecutor's Office or the parties, refer the cognisance of a case to a court closer to the place of the crime or offence. However, this is not an absolute right. The Court has full discretion to assess whether the circumstances justify such a change of venue.

In this case, the judges considered that the distance of the witnesses, experts and OPJ made their hearing more difficult and less effective. The Code of Criminal Procedure organises the hearing of witnesses at trial: the more distant they are, the higher the travel costs and the greater the risk of absence. By referring the case to Lille, the Court facilitates the discovery of the truth.

What few people know is that this provision is often used to guarantee the impartiality of the court. For example, if a case arouses strong local emotion, a transfer can avoid pressure on the judges. Here, the motive is purely practical: the convenience of hearings. The Court does not create new law; it applies an existing text. This is a confirmation of precedent rather than an evolution.

In my practice, I have encountered cases where landlord-owners requested the transfer of their tenancy dispute to a court closer to their home, arguing the distance of witnesses. However, the civil judge does not directly apply Article 696 CPP, which is reserved for criminal matters. In civil matters, it is Article 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) that allows transfer on grounds of legitimate suspicion. The logic is similar: to avoid a biased or inconvenient trial.

What this changes for you — concretely

For a landlord-owner in Cognin, this decision means that if you are involved in criminal proceedings (for example, for tenancy damage that led to a complaint), you can request the transfer of the case to a court closer to your home or to where the witnesses are located. Concretely, if your trial is to be held in Lyon but all the witnesses live in Chambéry, you can apply to the Court of Cassation for a transfer. Note: this step is exceptional and requires a lawyer. The witnesses' travel costs are then reduced, and the hearing can be more peaceful.

For a tenant, the mechanism is the same. If you are being sued for rent arrears and your defence relies on statements from neighbours who live in La Motte-Servolex, while the court is in Paris, you can request a transfer. But be careful: the Court of Cassation only grants this transfer if the distance is "considerable" and makes the hearing "difficult". In a concrete example: if the witnesses' travel costs exceed €500, this could be an argument.

For a buyer or co-owner, the change of venue can also play a role in construction or latent defect disputes. If the case is criminal (for example, deception as to surface area), a transfer can be requested. In practice, procedural delays may increase by a few months, but the gain in peace of mind is real. If you are in this situation, you must consult a lawyer to assess the advisability of such a request.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Anticipate the place of trial: in your leases or sale contracts, include a jurisdiction clause (for example, Chambéry court). This avoids subsequent transfer requests.
• Gather evidence locally: use experts or witnesses close to the court. If you are in Cognin, choose an expert based in Chambéry rather than Marseille.
• Consult a lawyer before any dispute: a lawyer specialised in property law can advise you on the best jurisdiction. Maître Zakine operates throughout the country and can help you.
• Mediate before litigating: a change of venue is a heavy procedure. First try mediation (Article 131-1 CPC). Mediation costs are often less than €1,000, compared to several thousand for a transfer.
• Check the impartiality of judges: if you fear local bias, a change of venue can be a solution. But prove legitimate suspicion with concrete elements (local press, personal connections).

Further analysis: related case law and developments

Before this judgment, the Court of Cassation had already applied Article 696 CPP in similar cases, such as the judgment of 10 January 1990 (No. 89-84.112) where it transferred a case from Toulouse to Bordeaux for reasons of convenience. The trend is consistent: the Court accepts transfer when the distance of witnesses is established and it does not harm the proper administration of justice.

A notable development is the extension of this mechanism to civil proceedings via Article 47 CPC, which allows transfer on grounds of legitimate suspicion. Since 2010, the Court of Cassation has rendered several judgments (e.g., Civ. 2e, 12 May 2016, No. 15-18.234) specifying that transfer can be requested even in the absence of suspicion, for reasons of geographical distance. This means that tomorrow, an owner in La Motte-Servolex could obtain the transfer of his civil dispute from Paris to Chambéry. However, the procedure is stricter and requires an order from the First President of the Court of Appeal.

Summary and next steps

FAQ:

1. Can I request the transfer of my case to another court? Yes, if you are a party to criminal proceedings and the distance of witnesses, experts or OPJ justifies it. Apply to the Court of Cassation through a lawyer.
2. What are the time limits? The Court rules within a few months. Allow 3 to 6 months between the request and the decision. In the meantime, the proceedings are suspended.
3. How much does it cost? Lawyers' fees for such a procedure range from €1,500 to €3,000, plus travel costs. But if you win, the State may cover some costs.
4. What if I am in a civil matter? Transfer is possible on the basis of Article 47 CPC, but only for legitimate suspicion. Distance alone is not sufficient, unless you prove excessive inconvenience.
5. What if my opponent requests a transfer? Challenge it if you believe the request is abusive. The judge has full discretion. A lawyer will help you defend your interests.

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 →