Being stopped, summoned or arrested in France is unsettling for anyone. For a British national, Brexit adds a second layer of uncertainty: the French words used by the police may describe a criminal investigation, an immigration check or a voluntary interview, while the United Kingdom can offer consular assistance but cannot replace a French defence lawyer. The first priority is therefore to identify the procedure, record the time and ask for the rights to be explained in a language you genuinely understand. This guide explains the practical difference between garde à vue (French police custody), audition libre (a voluntary suspect interview), and retenue (administrative detention used for an immigration-status check). It then sets out how to request an interpreter, a lawyer, a doctor, family contact and the British consulate. The French Code of Criminal Procedure applies to the criminal procedure even when the person lives in Britain, holds a Withdrawal Agreement residence permit or has just arrived for a short visit. Immigration consequences are a separate question and should not be assumed from the mere fact of arrest. The practical message is simple: do not sign a statement that you cannot read or understand, do not treat a summons as optional without advice, and ask for a lawyer at the earliest stage. The sections below also explain what relatives in the United Kingdom can do during the first hours and which documents should be preserved for a later challenge.

I. What happens when a British citizen is stopped, summoned or placed in garde à vue in France?

A. Is it an audition libre, an immigration check or police custody?

The word “arrested” covers several different situations in ordinary English. French procedure does not treat them as interchangeable. A British visitor may be asked questions at a roadside checkpoint, invited to a police station for an audition libre, held while officers verify identity or immigration status, or formally placed in garde à vue. The location may look the same, but the legal clock, the right to leave and the role of the lawyer differ.

Garde à vue is a coercive criminal measure. Article 62-2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure describes a person against whom there are “une ou plusieurs raisons plausibles de soupçonner” that a crime or imprisonable offence has been committed or attempted. It also requires the measure to be “l’unique moyen de parvenir à l’un au moins des objectifs suivants”, such as preserving evidence, preventing pressure on witnesses, securing the person’s presence before the prosecutor or ending the offence. The official text is available on Article 62-2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Nationality is not one of those conditions. A British passport does not by itself justify custody, and a French accent or limited French is not proof of an offence. Conversely, holding a French residence card does not prevent custody if the statutory conditions are met. The officer must be able to connect the measure to a suspected offence and to an investigative objective. The first question to ask, calmly, is therefore: “Am I in garde à vue, audition libre, retenue, or simply being checked?” If the answer is unclear, ask for the words to be written down or translated.

Audition libre means that a suspect is heard without being physically detained under the custody regime. Article 61-1 requires information about the alleged offence, the right to leave the premises at any time, the right to remain silent, the right to an interpreter and, for an offence punishable by imprisonment, the right to a lawyer under the statutory conditions. The provision states that the person must be informed “du droit de quitter à tout moment les locaux où elle est entendue”. See the current official text of Article 61-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

That right to leave does not mean that an English-speaking visitor should walk out before understanding the summons or the potential consequences. Leaving may be lawful in an audition libre, but it can also lead to a later summons, a new measure or a decision based on information already given. A practical response is to confirm whether departure is legally permitted, request counsel and ask for an interpreter before answering questions about the facts. The lawyer can decide whether attending immediately, postponing with a reason, or answering only limited questions protects the client better.

Retenue for an immigration check is different again. The French authorities can use an administrative procedure to verify a foreign national’s right to stay. For a British citizen, the relevant documents may include a passport, a long-stay visa, a Withdrawal Agreement residence permit, evidence of a pending application or documents showing the purpose and length of the stay. The Service-Public information on retenue for verification of the right to stay explains that this is not the same measure as criminal police custody. A criminal investigation and an immigration check can follow one another, but they have different legal bases and should be recorded separately.

After Brexit, the distinction matters particularly for people who have lived in France for years but are travelling without the document they normally use to prove their status. A person protected by the Withdrawal Agreement, a person holding a standard French residence permit and a short-term visitor are not in the same administrative position. The police may need to verify the status; that verification does not establish criminal guilt. Conversely, a criminal allegation can create an additional immigration issue, but the criminal allegation still has to be dealt with under criminal-procedure safeguards.

Customs or transport officers may also use terminology that sounds like an arrest. A British national questioned about goods, a vehicle or identity should ask which authority is acting and under which measure. The legal response to a customs inspection is not automatically the same as the response to an audition libre. If the questions turn to suspected theft, fraud, violence, drugs, driving offences or another imprisonable offence, request a lawyer and an interpreter before making a detailed statement.

French case law shows why precise facts matter. In Cour de cassation, Criminal Chamber, appeal no. 98-84.997, the court examined the notification of custody rights and the question of a language understood by the person in custody. In appeal no. 01-50.005, the court considered the diligence undertaken to identify the foreign national’s language and obtain an interpreter. These decisions do not create a general rule that every foreign national must always have a physically present interpreter immediately; they show instead that the authorities’ steps, the person’s actual comprehension and the timing must be documented.

For a British reader, the safest working assumption is that “I speak conversational French” is not the same as “I understand a criminal interview, the legal qualification, the right to silence and the consequences of a waiver”. If the subject matter is serious, request English interpretation and tell the officer which words or documents you do not understand. A request made at the start is easier to prove than an objection raised after several pages have been signed.

B. What must the French authorities tell you, and when can you leave?

When a person is placed in garde à vue, Article 63-1 requires immediate information about the nature and presumed date and place of the offence, the reasons for the measure, its maximum duration, and the principal rights available during the custody. The notification must be made “dans une langue qu’elle comprend”. This is not a promise that every document will be translated word for word on the spot. It is a safeguard against proceeding on the assumption that a person understands legal French when they do not.

The official wording and the complete list of rights can be checked in Article 63-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The officer should identify the suspected offence and explain the right to make statements, answer questions or remain silent. Silence is not a request to obstruct the investigation; it is a procedural choice that should be made with advice. A person should still provide accurate identity details when required and should not invent an explanation simply because the silence feels uncomfortable.

The custody clock normally begins at the legally defined time of deprivation of liberty, not at the convenient time when a form is eventually signed. The initial period is ordinarily 24 hours, with extensions possible only under the conditions provided by law and with the intervention required for the particular offence. The precise calculation can be affected by an earlier period of restraint or by the nature of the suspected offence. Ask the lawyer to record the time of physical restraint, arrival, notification, first interview and any extension decision. Relatives should write down the time the person was last free and the time the station first confirmed the custody.

A British national who is told to sign a French notification should ask for an English version or an interpreter and should not treat a signature as proof that every sentence was understood. A signature may acknowledge receipt rather than agreement, but the legal effect depends on the document. Before signing, ask the lawyer what the signature confirms, whether a reservation can be added, and whether an objection about translation should be written in the record. Do not rely on a phone translation app for a waiver of a right, an account of an accident or an admission.

Article 803-5 addresses the right to an interpreter and translation. If there is doubt about the person’s capacity to understand French, the authority must verify that the person speaks and understands it. The current Article 803-5 also permits remote interpretation in specified circumstances, provided that the communication is reliable and confidential. Remote interpretation can be practical at night or in a rural station, but the person should say immediately if the sound is poor, the interpreter is not neutral, or a legal term remains unclear.

The implementing rules are important where a person initially says that no interpreter is needed and later struggles with legal French. Under Articles D594-1 and D594-2, the authority must use appropriate means to check comprehension when doubt exists, and an interpreter should intervene without delay when the person does not understand French. A challenge to the absence or quality of interpretation can be recorded in the interview record or placed in the file later. Say the objection clearly and ask that the exact objection be included in the procès-verbal, meaning the official record.

The Cour de cassation has repeatedly treated the timing and circumstances as fact-sensitive. In appeal no. 09-12.923, the court’s published reasoning included the words “les dispositions de l’article 63-1 lesquelles n’exigent pas le recours à un interprète et encore moins sa présence physique” in a case where the person was found to understand the notification. That reasoning should not be read as a licence to dispense with interpretation whenever a British citizen knows basic French. The question is whether the notification and interview were genuinely understood on the facts.

In the opposite direction, appeal no. 19-85.812 records the requirement for the lower court to address whether there were “aucune circonstance insurmontable justifiant qu’il ait été impossible, en l’espèce, de faire immédiatement appel à un interprète en langue italienne”. The language in that decision concerns Italian, but the procedural lesson applies to an English-speaking British national: a delay in finding an interpreter needs a concrete explanation, and a court can examine whether the delay affected the exercise of rights.

An audition libre has a different exit rule. If the person has been properly informed of the right to leave and is not detained under another measure, they may leave. They should still request an interpreter where there is doubt, because the information about the offence, silence, legal assistance and the right to leave must be meaningful. If an officer says that the person is now in custody, the situation has changed and the custody rights should be notified afresh. A person should not confuse a friendly invitation to “come in for a few questions” with an assurance that the conversation has no legal effect.

There are also limits to what the police must disclose at the custody stage. The person is told the suspected offence and rights, but the lawyer does not automatically receive the complete investigation file during the first interview. That limitation makes the client’s own account, the timing, the interpreter’s role and the physical condition of the person especially important. If the allegation concerns an incident in a home, vehicle, workplace, hotel or public place, relatives should preserve messages, receipts, travel records, CCTV requests and witness details without contacting suspected co-participants about the facts.

Finally, do not assume that release means the matter is over. The prosecutor may release the person, issue a later summons, refer the person to a court, seek a more serious judicial measure or continue another investigation. If the person is transferred to a prosecutor or judge, the rights and time limits change again. The first custody lawyer should receive the complete chronology and all translation objections so that the next procedural decision is made with the original record in mind.

II. What can a British national do about a lawyer, interpreter, consulate and the next steps?

A. How do you obtain an English-speaking lawyer and protect the record?

The lawyer’s role begins before the substantive interview. Article 63-3-1 provides that, “Dès le début de la garde à vue et à tout moment au cours de celle-ci”, the person may request assistance from a chosen lawyer or a duty lawyer. The official rule is set out in Article 63-3-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A British national can name a French lawyer already known to the family, ask the station to contact a lawyer, or request a lawyer appointed through the local bar. If the chosen lawyer cannot attend, ask what alternatives are available rather than waiving assistance without advice.

The first private interview is confidential and limited in duration. Article 63-4 states: “La durée de l’entretien ne peut excéder trente minutes.” See the official text of Article 63-4. A short meeting can still be useful. Tell the lawyer the chronology, injuries, medication, language difficulties, witnesses, documents and anything that may disappear. Do not use the meeting to guess what the police know. The lawyer needs a reliable account of what happened and a clear list of what the client does not understand.

The lawyer’s access to the first records is also defined by law. On request, the lawyer may consult the custody-notification record, the medical certificate and the records of the client’s interviews, but cannot normally demand or make a copy at that stage. Article 63-4-1 says: “Il ne peut en demander ou en réaliser une copie. Il peut toutefois prendre des notes.” The complete official text is available at Article 63-4-1. This is why the client should tell counsel about every mistranslation, missing page, unexplained signature and interruption while the events are fresh.

The person may request the lawyer’s attendance at interviews and confrontations. Article 63-4-2 states that “La personne gardée à vue peut demander que l’avocat assiste à ses auditions et confrontations.” Consult Article 63-4-2 for the conditions and the exceptional rules allowing a delay in the lawyer’s participation. A person should not sign a statement saying that they waive the lawyer’s presence merely because the first lawyer is delayed or the station says the interview will be short. Ask counsel to explain the consequences in English or through an interpreter.

For an English-speaking client, lawyer and interpreter are separate functions. The interpreter translates the questions and answers. The lawyer advises on silence, evidence, procedure and strategy. A consular officer provides welfare and practical assistance but does not act as defence counsel. An English-speaking French lawyer may still need an interpreter if the client’s legal French is uncertain, and a client who speaks French socially may reasonably ask for interpretation during a technical confrontation.

Medical assistance is not a courtesy reserved for visible injuries. Under Article 63-3, a person in custody may request examination by a doctor, and the official text states: “Le médecin examine sans délai la personne gardée à vue.” Ask for a medical examination after an accident, an assault, a panic attack, withdrawal symptoms, a medication issue, a disability-related need or a prolonged period without sleep. Tell the doctor the symptoms and ask counsel to ensure that the certificate is placed in the file. Relatives should provide medication names and medical contacts through the lawyer or the station.

The request to contact family should also be explicit. Article 63-2 provides that a person in custody can ask for a relative, a person with whom they normally live, an employer or another designated person to be notified. For a foreign national, it adds: “Lorsque la personne gardée à vue est de nationalité étrangère, elle peut faire contacter les autorités consulaires de son pays.” See Article 63-2. Ask that the consular request be entered in the record, especially if the person’s passport, residence documents or medication are outside the station.

The UK Government’s information pack for British nationals arrested or detained in France explains the practical boundary: consular staff can contact the person, provide welfare information and help with lists of lawyers or interpreters, but they cannot interfere with the French investigation, provide legal representation or pay a private lawyer’s fees. The consulate should therefore be treated as an additional channel, not as a substitute for a French criminal lawyer.

Relatives in Britain should prepare a concise message rather than repeatedly calling the police station. The message should contain the person’s full name, date of birth, nationality, passport number if known, station or court, approximate time of detention, medical needs, preferred language and the name of any chosen lawyer. The family should ask for confirmation that the consular request and medical information were passed on. They should not discuss the suspected facts on social media or send a chain of speculative messages to the person’s phone.

Where an interpreter is absent or ineffective, the objection must be practical and precise. Say: “I do not understand this legal term. I request an English interpreter. Please record this request.” If the interpreter is remote, identify the technical problem and ask for it to be recorded. If a translation is inaccurate, state the exact correction and ask for the observation to be inserted into the procès-verbal. Article 803-5 requires the authorities to verify comprehension where doubt exists; it does not require a person to remain silent about a deficient interpretation.

The case law illustrates the value of a detailed record. Cour de cassation, appeal no. 04-50.057, addressed the need to identify an insurmountable circumstance before accepting a significant delay in obtaining an interpreter for a foreign national. Cour de cassation, appeal no. 16-85.187, considered information given through an interpreter and the effect of a non-equivocal waiver of a lawyer. The outcome of a later challenge depends on the facts, the record and any prejudice, not solely on the person’s nationality.

Do not ask the consulate to “fix” a French document. Ask the French lawyer to examine whether a notification, extension, interview or search complied with the Code of Criminal Procedure. If there was an unlawful delay, a failure to record a request, an inaccurate translation or a medical issue, counsel can decide how and when to raise it. Some challenges must be made at a particular procedural stage; waiting until a final hearing may reduce the available remedy.

Legal costs should be discussed at the first contact. A duty lawyer may be appointed for custody, but the scope of later representation, private fees and eligibility for aide juridictionnelle (French legal aid) depend on the procedure and the client’s circumstances. A British resident or visitor should ask for a written explanation of what is covered. The consulate can provide practical signposts, but it does not decide eligibility and does not guarantee payment.

B. What should your family do after release, court referral or an immigration consequence?

At the end of garde à vue, several outcomes are possible. The person may be released without an immediate court date, given a later summons, referred to the prosecutor, brought before a judge, placed under judicial supervision or directed towards a court hearing. The precise French label matters. A convocation is a summons; a comparution immédiate is an immediate court appearance; a mise en examen is a formal investigative status imposed by an investigating judge. None should be translated casually as “the case is finished”.

If the person receives a summons after release, preserve the original, every envelope and the date and method of service. Obtain a full translation and ask a lawyer to check the alleged offence, the hearing location, the attendance requirement and the consequences of non-attendance. A British citizen who returns to the United Kingdom is not automatically outside the reach of a French summons. Travel plans, work commitments and the need for an interpreter should be raised early, not on the morning of the hearing.

If the prosecutor sends the person to court quickly, the lawyer should check whether the person has had meaningful access to counsel, the file required for preparation, interpretation and time to decide whether to accept or contest the procedure. A person who has just left custody may be exhausted, medicated or frightened. Ask for an adjournment or another procedural safeguard where the preparation time is not adequate. Do not accept an English summary from a friend as a substitute for the formal documents.

If an investigating judge becomes involved, the criminal case can last much longer. Keep one secure folder containing the custody record, interview notes, translations, lawyer correspondence, medical evidence, travel history and all court documents. Give counsel a chronology in plain English with dates and sources. Mark what is certain, what is inferred and what another witness can prove. Do not edit screenshots or delete messages. Preserve the original files and metadata where possible.

A criminal procedure may also produce an administrative issue about the right to remain in France, but the two tracks are not identical. A British citizen with a Withdrawal Agreement residence card may need to explain status, absence from France, renewal history or the effect of a criminal decision. A visitor may face questions about the duration and purpose of the stay. A long-stay visa holder may need to comply with a different residence regime. The person should provide the immigration lawyer with the criminal documents, while ensuring that the criminal lawyer understands the residence status. One lawyer’s assumption about the other track can create avoidable risk.

Do not hand over a residence card, passport or visa without asking who is taking it, for what purpose and when it can be recovered, unless the lawful authority requires the document. Make secure copies of both sides of every document before travelling. Record the expiry date, application reference, prefecture appointment, address in France and any proof of a Withdrawal Agreement application. A consular officer may help a British national understand how to replace a passport, but only the French authorities determine the criminal or immigration procedure.

The family should also distinguish the person’s status as suspect, witness or victim. A British national injured in France may need to make a complaint, preserve medical evidence and seek compensation. A witness may receive a summons or be heard as an audition libre without being a suspect. A person questioned about another family member’s conduct should not assume that being “only a witness” eliminates the right to advice. Ask the lawyer what status appears on the document before providing a detailed account.

After release, write down the following while memories are fresh:

• the time and place of the first contact, the time of physical restraint and the time of release;
• the exact words used to describe the measure, including garde à vue, audition libre or retenue;
• the name or identification number of each station, officer, lawyer and interpreter, if available;
• every request for an English interpreter, lawyer, doctor, family contact or consular contact and the response;
• documents signed, pages not understood, translation errors, interruptions and requests that were not entered in the record;
• medication, injuries, sleep, food, language difficulties and any conduct that affected the ability to answer; and
• the next date, deadline, court, prefecture or reporting obligation shown on any document.

The family should then arrange a short conference with the lawyer, not a group interrogation of the person who has just been released. Ask three questions first: what is the current procedural status, what deadline comes next, and what evidence must be preserved today? Then ask whether a translation or interpreter complaint needs to be formalised, whether a residence notification must be answered, and whether travel outside France could affect attendance or status. A disciplined first meeting is more useful than trying to reconstruct the entire case through informal messages.

For a person who has not yet been arrested but has received a French police summons, preparation is possible. Send the document to counsel, identify whether it says audition libre, check the alleged qualification and date, arrange an interpreter and bring only original documents that are relevant. Do not ignore the letter because it arrived in French. Do not assume that attending with a friend who speaks French gives the same protection as an authorised interpreter and a lawyer. The purpose of the appointment should be clear before the client enters the station.

If the allegation concerns driving, an accident, a domestic dispute, drugs, tax or financial conduct, the administrative consequences can be as important as the initial questioning. A driving licence can be suspended; a protective order can affect contact with a partner or child; a financial investigation can involve bank records; and a criminal decision can be considered in a later residence procedure. Tell the lawyer about the wider context without trying to negotiate directly with a complainant or co-suspect. Separate legal advice should be obtained quickly where family, immigration or employment consequences overlap.

Finally, check the official law rather than relying on an old internet checklist. The Code of Criminal Procedure changes, and the date of the measure controls the version that may apply. The Légifrance links in this article identify the provisions used for the core safeguards; the Justice.fr explanation of garde à vue and the Service-Public page on garde à vue provide an accessible overview, but neither replaces an individual review of the record. The UK consular pack is useful for contact and welfare information, while the French lawyer handles the defence strategy and procedural deadlines.

Conclusion

A British citizen in France should not allow the word “arrested” or the fact of Brexit to blur the legal steps. First identify whether the person is in garde à vue, audition libre, retenue or another measure. Then record the time, request information in a language understood, ask for a French lawyer and an interpreter, and request medical, family and consular contact when needed. The UK consulate can provide welfare support, but it cannot conduct the defence. A French lawyer must examine the notification, the timing, the records, the translations and any later court or immigration consequence.

The strongest early evidence is often simple: the exact document, the exact time, the exact language request and the exact response. Preserve those details, do not sign what you do not understand, and obtain advice before the next interview or deadline. That approach protects both a short-term visitor and a long-term British resident in France.