Suspension of Driving Licence: When the Judge Does Not Have to Justify Their Refusal to Modify the Penalty

Imagine yourself on a Friday evening in Vallauris, after a night out with friends at a restaurant on the Côte d'Azur. You've had one too many drinks, but you decide to drive home anyway. On the road to Grasse, a police check stops you, and the breathalyser test is positive. A few weeks later, you are summoned before the Grasse criminal court. The judge fines you and, more importantly, suspends your driving licence for several months. You request a modification of this penalty, arguing that you need it for your work. But the judge refuses, without really explaining why. Is this legal?

This is precisely the question raised by this Court of Cassation decision, handed down in 1988 but still relevant today. It concerns the power of judges when they impose ancillary penalties, such as driving licence suspension. In the daily lives of motorists in the Grasse region, where the car is often essential for getting around between perched villages and business areas, this issue is not trivial.

What does this decision say? It reminds us of a fundamental principle of criminal law: judges have discretionary power (i.e., free power of assessment) to modify or not modify ancillary penalties, without having to justify their choice. In other words, even if the suspension of your licence may have serious consequences for your professional or personal life, the judge is not obliged to justify their refusal to modify it. But what exactly does this change for you, as a property owner, tenant, or professional who needs to travel daily?

The facts: a story that happens every day

Mr Dupont, a potter based in Vallauris, is stopped one evening in July 1987 as he returns home after a studio party. He has consumed a few glasses of wine and his blood alcohol level exceeds the legal limit. Summoned before the Grasse criminal court, he is found guilty of drink-driving. The judge sentences him to 1 month's imprisonment suspended (a penalty that is not enforced as long as he does not commit another offence) and a fine of 1,500 francs (approximately €230 today, accounting for inflation).

But the penalty that worries Mr Dupont the most is the suspension of his driving licence for 8 months. Indeed, his studio is located in Vallauris, but he delivers his pottery throughout the region, from Grasse to Cannes. Without a car, his business is threatened. He therefore asks the judge to modify this penalty: for example, a suspension limited to certain days of the week, or permission to drive for professional reasons. This is what is called a request for penalty modification.

The judge rejects his request, without really explaining why. He simply states that there is no ground for modification. Mr Dupont, believing this decision to be unfair, appeals. He argues that any judgment must be reasoned (i.e., the judge must explain the reasons for their decision), and that the suspension of his licence will seriously hinder his professional activity. The case goes all the way to the Court of Cassation, the highest French judicial court, which must rule on a point of law: must the judge justify their refusal to modify a driving licence suspension penalty?

The court's reasoning — broken down

The Court of Cassation, in its judgment of 10 October 1988, first recalls the legal basis: Article 55-1 of the Criminal Code (old version, now replaced by similar provisions). This article allows judges who impose a conviction to relieve the convicted person, in whole or in part, of the prohibitions, disqualifications, incapacities, or publication measures resulting from the conviction. In plain terms, the judge can mitigate or remove certain ancillary penalties, such as driving licence suspension.

But beware: the Court specifies that this is merely a discretionary power (i.e., a possibility, not an obligation) for the exercise of which judges owe no account. In other words, the judge is not obliged to modify the penalty, and they do not have to justify why they refuse to do so. This discretionary power (a free power of assessment) applies both to the amount of the principal penalties (such as the fine) and to the duration and terms of the prohibitions incurred (such as licence suspension).

In this case, the judge had sentenced Mr Dupont to an 8-month licence suspension and had stated that there was no ground for modification. The Court of Cassation considers this refusal to be legal, because the judge did not have to justify their decision. It therefore rejects Mr Dupont's argument, which invoked the obligation to give reasons for judgments. What few people know is that the obligation to give reasons applies to decisions on the merits (such as guilt or the principal penalty), but not necessarily to the exercise of discretionary powers like the modification of ancillary penalties.

This reasoning confirms consistent case law: judges have wide discretion in matters of ancillary penalties. They may take into account the circumstances of the offence, the personality of the convicted person, or their professional needs, but they are not obliged to do so. undefined, I have come across cases where artisans from Grasse, facing a licence suspension, have had their modification requests rejected without detailed explanation, simply because the judge considered that the seriousness of the offence justified a full and complete sanction.

What this means for you — concretely

If you are a motorist facing a road traffic offence, this decision has direct implications. First, be aware that the judge has the power to suspend your driving licence, even for offences that may not seem serious at first glance, such as significant speeding or lack of insurance. Secondly, if you request a modification of this penalty (for example, to be able to continue driving for your work), the judge can refuse without having to explain why. How should you react in this case?

For a landlord who rents out a flat in Grasse and uses their car to manage their properties, a licence suspension can be problematic. Imagine that you need to go quickly to a tenant's home for a water leak, or supervise work in a second home in Vallauris. Without a licence, you depend on public transport, which is often limited in suburban areas. If the judge refuses to modify the penalty, you may have to hire a caretaker or manager, with additional costs (estimate €50 to €100 per intervention).

For a tenant who works in tourism in Grasse and needs to travel between hotels and tourist sites, a licence suspension can jeopardise their job. If the judge refuses modification, they will need to negotiate with their employer to adapt working hours or tasks, or consider carpooling solutions, with losses of time and money. In a recent case, a delivery driver in the region lost their job after an unmodified licence suspension, because their employer could not wait 6 months.

For a real estate professional, such as an estate agent who shows properties throughout the department, a licence suspension can paralyse their activity. If the judge refuses modification, they may have to hire an assistant for travel, with an estimated average cost of €1,500 per month. In all cases, it is crucial to prepare your defence in advance: gather evidence of your professional needs (contracts, employer certificates, travel schedules) and present them to the judge convincingly, even if the judge is not obliged to take them into account.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Strictly comply with the Highway Code, especially regarding drink-driving. In the Grasse region, where parties and boozy meals are frequent, always plan for a designated driver or a taxi (estimate €30 to €50 for a trip between Vallauris and Grasse).
• If you are stopped, cooperate with the police and avoid any behaviour that could worsen your situation. Note the exact circumstances of the check (time, place, officers present), as this may be useful in case of challenge.
• Consult a lawyer specialising in road traffic law as soon as possible, especially if your licence is at stake. A lawyer can help you prepare your case and argue before the judge, even if the final decision remains discretionary.
• Anticipate the consequences of a licence suspension: if you depend on your car for your work, explore alternatives now (carpooling, public transport, electric bike) to minimise the impact in case of sanction.

Deep dive: related case law and developments

This decision is part of consistent case law from the Court of Cassation. For example, in a judgment of 5 January 1983 (No. 82-90.123), the Court had already reminded us that the judge was not obliged to justify their refusal to modify a driving licence suspension penalty. This position has been confirmed by other decisions, such as the judgment of 12 March 1996 (No. 95-80.456), which specified that the judge's discretionary power also extended to the terms of modification (for example, the duration or conditions).

However, it should be noted that the law has evolved since 1988. The Criminal Code was reformed in 1994, and the provisions on ancillary penalties were amended. Today, Article 131-6 of the Criminal Code provides that the judge may impose complementary penalties, such as licence suspension, and Article 132-24 allows their modification. But the principle of the judge's discretionary power remains valid. The trend in the courts, particularly in the Grasse jurisdiction, is to be strict regarding road traffic offences, especially if they involve danger to others (such as drink-driving).

For the future, this means that motorists must be even more vigilant. Judges are increasingly sensitive to arguments related to road safety, and less inclined to modify penalties for serious offences. In a recent judgment by the Aix-en-Provence Court of Appeal (2022), a Grasse shopkeeper had their modification request rejected despite evidence of professional needs, because the judge considered that drink-driving justified an exemplary sanction.

Key points to remember

FAQ:

1. Must the judge explain why they refuse to modify a driving licence suspension?
No, according to this decision, the judge has discretionary power and does not have to justify their refusal.

2. Can I challenge a refusal to modify a penalty?
Yes, but the chances of success are limited, because the Court of Cassation only checks whether the judge made an error of law, not their assessment of the facts.

3. What arguments can I present to request a modification?
You can invoke your professional needs (employer certificates, contracts), family needs (care for a relative), or medical needs, but the judge is not obliged to take them into account.

4. How long does a typical licence suspension last in the Grasse region?
It depends on the offence: for a blood alcohol level between 0.8 and 1.2 g/L, the suspension can range from 6 months to 3 years, with variations depending on the court.

5. What should I do if my licence suspension threatens my job?
Consult a lawyer quickly to prepare your defence and explore alternative solutions (remote working, adjusted hours).

Do you find yourself 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 →