Cabinet Kohen Avocats · Paris

—

Maître Reda KOHEN intervient en droit immobilier, droit des sociétés et droit des affaires à Paris. Première analyse : 80 € TTC, réponse personnelle sous 24 heures.

100 % confidentiel · Secret professionnel · Sans engagement

Article généré par une intelligence artificielle, selon un processus conçu et contrôlé par le cabinet

Source : Cour de cassation – Base Open Data « Judilibre » & « Légifrance ».

Barreau de Paris Immobilier, sociétés, affaires Fiche CNB avocat.fr
Maître Reda KOHEN, avocat au Barreau de Paris
Maître Reda KOHEN
Avocat au Barreau de Paris

Your French Company Filing Was Blocked While You Live Abroad: Apostille, Sworn Translation, Domiciliation and Beneficial Owners on the Road to the Kbis

You live in London, New York, Dubai or Singapore. You decided to set up your French company, you gathered your passport, your proof of address, your draft articles of association (statuts), and you filed everything on the guichet unique, the single online desk for business formalities. Then the status turned red: file rejected, incomplete, additional documents requested. No Kbis, no SIREN number usable with clients, no bank account, and the launch date you promised your first customer is slipping away. This situation is extremely common for foreign founders, and it almost always comes down to the same four stumbling blocks: foreign civil-status or company documents without an apostille or legalisation, documents in English without a sworn French translation, a registered office (siège social) without acceptable proof of occupation, and a missing or incorrect beneficial-owner declaration. This article explains, step by step, how a founder living abroad gets past each of these controls and obtains the Kbis, the official company identity extract issued by the greffe, the registry office of the commercial court. Greffe means the clerk’s office of the commercial court that keeps the registre du commerce et des sociétés (RCS, the trade and companies register); the Kbis is the extract that proves your company exists. Every French acronym used below is explained the first time it appears.

I. Why the Guichet Unique Says No: Foreign Papers That Block Registration

Since 1 January 2023, almost every creation, modification or closure formality must go through one single online body, the guichet unique des formalités d’entreprises operated by the INPI (Institut national de la propriété industrielle, the French intellectual-property and business-formalities office). The rule is stated in the Commercial Code: “Ce dossier est déposé par voie électronique auprès d’un organisme unique désigné à cet effet.” In plain English, you file one electronic dossier, and that filing counts as your declaration to every administration concerned, but only once the dossier is complete and correct for each recipient. For a founder living abroad, this single-desk logic has a direct consequence: any weak foreign document freezes the whole file, because the INPI desk forwards your dossier to the greffe of the commercial court, to INSEE (Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques, which issues the SIREN number), and to the tax and social-security bodies, and each of them can bounce it back. Understanding the two most frequent rejection grounds, authentication of foreign documents and translation, is therefore the fastest way to unblock your project.

A. How to Make Your Foreign Documents Count in France: Apostille or Legalisation, Then Sworn Translation

The first question the greffe asks about every foreign civil-status paper, birth certificate, marriage certificate, criminal-record extract, or parent-company document, is whether France can trust it. French law starts from a welcoming principle. Article 47 of the Civil Code provides that “Tout acte de l’état civil des Français et des étrangers fait en pays étranger et rédigé dans les formes usitées dans ce pays fait foi, sauf si d’autres actes ou pièces détenus, des données extérieures ou des éléments tirés de l’acte lui-même établissent, le cas échéant après toutes vérifications utiles, que cet acte est irrégulier, falsifié ou que les faits qui y sont déclarés ne correspondent pas à la réalité.” In other words, a foreign civil-status act drawn up in the usual local forms is presumed reliable, unless contrary evidence shows it is irregular, forged, or false. But that presumption does not exempt you from proving the origin of the document, and that is exactly where foreign founders get stopped: the greffe wants an apostille or a legalisation stamp on top of the foreign paper.

The distinction is simple and depends entirely on the issuing country. If the country issued the document is a party to the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961, the United States, the United Kingdom, India, Hong Kong and many others, a single stamp called an apostille, issued by the designated authority of that country, is enough. The apostille certifies the signature, the capacity of the signatory and the seal on the document. If the country is not a party to that Convention, mainland China documents aside under specific arrangements, Canada, the United Arab Emirates, Singapore, most Gulf and African states, you need full legalisation: first certification by the foreign ministry of the issuing country, then legalisation by the French consulate or embassy competent for that district. The official service-public.fr guidance for foreign public acts describes this two-track system and the online apostille and legalisation request service run by the French Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs, so check the country table before you pay anyone: an apostille request sent to a country that requires legalisation, or the reverse, costs you two to four weeks. Remember that the chain matters more than the paper itself. A birth certificate that is perfectly genuine but bears no apostille and no consular stamp will be treated by the guichet unique exactly like a missing document, and the file will be marked incomplete.

The Cour de cassation, France’s highest civil court, confirmed how strictly judges look at this authentication step in a widely noted decision of 17 December 2025, First Civil Chamber, appeal no. 24-12.599, published in the Bulletin. The Court ruled by reference to international custom as restated in Article 16, II of the Justice Reform Act no. 2019-222 of 23 March 2019, and recalled the wording of Article 47 of the Civil Code quoted above: “Vu la coutume internationale, telle que reprise par l’article 16, II, alinéas 1 et 2, de la loi n° 2019-222 du 23 mars 2019, modifié par l’article 48 de la loi n° 2023-1059 du 20 novembre 2023”, foreign civil-status statements that are not duly legalised may only be taken into account in narrowly defined situations, for instance where the act was legalised in line with the practices of the country of origin under a procedure offering sufficient authentication guarantees, a point the trial judge must assess. The case concerned nationality litigation, not company registration, but the signal for founders is identical: when the greffe asks for legalisation, do not argue that your document looks genuine. Supply the apostille or the consular legalisation, and keep the receipt, because the INPI desk sometimes asks for proof that the chain is in progress when the foreign authority is slow.

The second half of the same obstacle is language. Every document filed with the greffe must be in French or accompanied by a translation into French by a translator registered on an official list, a traducteur assermenté, meaning a sworn translator approved by a French court of appeal. A translation done by yourself, by your foreign lawyer, by a bilingual friend or even by a certified translator who is not on a French court list will be rejected. This applies to your passport details page only in some greffes and systematically to birth certificates, marriage certificates, divorce decrees affecting your matrimonial regime, foreign criminal-record extracts, powers of attorney signed abroad, and every parent-company document, certificate of incorporation, articles, board resolution authorising the French subsidiary, where a foreign company founds or owns the French entity. Practical tip from abroad: ask the sworn translator for a translation that reproduces the apostille or legalisation page too, and staples or digitally binds the translation to a copy of the source, because several greffes, including the Paris greffe at the tribunal de commerce de Paris, check that the translation covers the authentication stamps, not just the body of the act. Budget roughly one week and a few dozen euros per page, and never let the translation date predate the apostille where the apostille number must be quoted. A file where the translation ignores the apostille page is a file that goes back to the bottom of the queue.

Two related papers deserve special attention because founders discover them late. First, the declaration of non-conviction, the signed statement that you have never been convicted of a criminal offence barring you from managing a company. The form is French, must be signed, and for some nationalities the greffe additionally requires a foreign criminal-record extract, itself apostilled and translated. Second, the proof of identity and of the right to manage. EU, EEA and Swiss nationals file an identity card or passport. Non-EU founders who will personally manage the French company from France need a residence permit authorising management; if you manage entirely from abroad without residing in France, no residence permit is needed, but the INPI form still asks for your foreign address with proof. The order implementing Article R.123-166 of the Commercial Code lists the supporting documents for each filing type and the residence documents required of persons who must justify stays in France, so a non-EU founder should read that list before assuming a tourist visa suffices. Filing a manager’s declaration with the wrong residence status is one of the few mistakes that can turn a simple delay into a formal refusal rather than a request for correction.

B. Where Your Company Lives on Paper: Proving the Registered Office From Abroad

Every French company needs a siège social, a registered office that determines the competent commercial court, the applicable greffe, and the address printed on the Kbis, on invoices and in the BODACC (Bulletin officiel des annonces civiles et commerciales, the official gazette where company creations and changes are published). From abroad, founders typically hesitate between four options: the home address of a French-based partner, a commercial lease, a domiciliation company, or the personal dwelling of the manager. All four are lawful, but each demands a specific proof of occupation, and missing or mismatched proof is the second great cause of blocked files.

The Commercial Code states the principle for individuals and, by extension and practice, frames what greffes expect from companies: “Les personnes physiques demandant leur immatriculation au registre du commerce et des sociétés ou au registre national des entreprises en tant qu’entreprise du secteur des métiers et de l’artisanat doivent déclarer l’adresse de leur entreprise et en justifier la jouissance.” You must declare the business address and prove that you are entitled to use it. For a company, that means uploading the right title: a signed lease or sublease, a domiciliation contract with an approved domiciliation company, a provision-of-premises agreement, or the title deed or recent property tax notice where the manager houses the seat in their own French dwelling, plus the manager’s written authorisation and, in the domiciliation case, the approval number of the domiciliation provider. A simple letter from a friend saying you may use their Paris flat, with no contract and no identity document of the host, will not pass. Neither will a foreign address: the siège social of a French SAS (société par actions simplifiée, the flexible joint-stock company most foreign founders choose) or SARL (société à responsabilité limitée, the limited-liability company with stricter statutory rules) must be in France, because registration attaches the company to a French court.

Domiciliation through a specialised company deserves a closer look, because it is the standard solution for founders with no premises in France. The domiciliation contract must identify the provider’s approval, the exact address granted, and the services effectively available, mail handling, meeting rooms, and it must be signed before filing, since the INPI form asks for the start date of occupation. Check that the address you type in the online form matches the contract letter for letter, including floor, stairway and postcode: automated cross-checks between the form fields and the uploaded contract generate a surprising share of rejections, and correcting a typo restarts the examination period. If you choose a Paris or Île-de-France address while living abroad, which many founders do for credibility with French clients and banks, remember the practical consequence: your file goes to the Paris greffe, one of the busiest in France, where examination times stretch when files are incomplete. A clean domiciliation file is typically processed in days; a file with an unsigned contract or a mismatched address can sit for weeks in back-and-forth corrections. The Paris location itself never justifies a satellite article or a separate filing; it is simply one line of your main registration, with the competent court, realistic timeframes, the documents to prepare and the procedural channel explained once, here.

One more proof point specific to foreign-owned projects: where the founder or shareholder is itself a foreign company, the greffe will ask for that parent company’s existence documents, certificate of incorporation or equivalent, dated recently, apostilled or legalised as explained above, translated by a sworn translator, plus the corporate decision authorising the creation of the French entity and appointing the person who signs the French statuts. The chain of powers must be unbroken from the foreign board resolution down to the signature on the INPI form. Founders who file as individuals avoid this entire layer, which is one reason advisers often recommend that the foreign individual, rather than the foreign company, subscribe the first shares directly, at least at the creation stage, before reorganising the group later once the Kbis is in hand.

II. What the Greffe Checks After Accepting Your File: Owners, Managers and the Kbis Itself

Getting past authentication, translation and domiciliation does not end the examination. The greffe then verifies who owns and who runs the company, starting with the declaration of beneficial owners, and only then issues the Kbis that gives the company legal life. Both steps contain traps for founders filing from abroad, because the information must be exact on day one and updated within short statutory deadlines afterwards. The good news is that these are paper traps, not discretionary refusals: a correctly completed file passes, and the publication of your company in the BODACC follows automatically.

A. Who Really Owns the Company: Declaring Your Beneficial Owners (RBE) in the Same Filing

The RBE, registre des bénéficiaires effectifs, the beneficial-owners register, is the confidential section of the RCS identifying the individuals who ultimately own or control the company, generally those holding directly or indirectly more than 25 percent of the capital or voting rights, or exercising control by other means. As a foreign founder owning your French SAS or SARL, that is you, and where several foreign partners or a foreign holding company sit above the French entity, each ultimate individual must be identified with full name, date and place of birth, nationality, personal address and the exact terms of control. The substantive duty is set by the Monetary and Financial Code, which requires the companies and entities concerned to declare their beneficial owners through the single body: “déclarent au registre du commerce et des sociétés, par l’intermédiaire de l’organisme mentionné au deuxième alinéa de l’article L. 123-33 du code de commerce, les informations relatives aux bénéficiaires effectifs”. In practice, the RBE form (M’BE) is filed together with the creation dossier on the guichet unique, through that same single body, so a missing M’BE page blocks registration just as surely as a missing lease.

Timing and updating rules are strict. The implementing provision states that “Les informations relatives aux bénéficiaires effectifs mentionnées au premier alinéa de l’article L. 561-46 sont déclarées au greffe du tribunal de commerce lors de la demande d’immatriculation au registre du commerce et des sociétés”, and that “La société ou l’entité immatriculée demande une inscription modificative dans les trente jours suivant tout fait ou acte rendant nécessaire la rectification ou le complément des informations déclarées.” File the beneficial owners with the creation request, then file an update within thirty days of any change: sale of shares, new partner, change of personal address, change in the chain of control through a foreign holding company. Founders living abroad frequently miss this second duty, because the change happens under foreign law, a share transfer signed in London, an address move to a new country, and nobody tells the French company. The sanction mechanism is real and judicial. Article L.561-48 of the Monetary and Financial Code provides that “Le président du tribunal, d’office ou sur requête du procureur de la République ou de toute personne justifiant y avoir intérêt, peut enjoindre, au besoin sous astreinte, à toute société ou entité juridique mentionnée au premier alinéa de l’article L. 561-46 de procéder ou faire procéder soit aux déclarations des informations relatives au bénéficiaire effectif, soit à la rectification de ces informations lorsqu’elles sont inexactes ou incomplètes.” The president of the court can order the company, on pain of a daily penalty, to file or correct the declaration, and the clerk reports non-compliance to the public prosecutor, with striking off the register possible after three months.

This is not theory. On 18 May 2026, the president of the Troyes commercial court, ruling on injunction requests from the public prosecutor, ordered company managers to file their beneficial-owner declarations within one month of notification, under penalty, and then, finding non-compliance recorded by the clerk, liquidated the penalties, setting a 500-euro penalty against the legal representatives, recoverable like other non-tax State debts. The order (Troyes commercial court, 18 May 2026, RG 2026000538, on beneficial-owner declarations) follows a standard template applied case after case, which shows that greffes and prosecutors process these files in batches: a foreign founder who treats the RBE as optional paperwork will eventually receive the same injunction at the Paris siège address, possibly months after creation, with a penalty attached. The practical lesson is to file the M’BE completely on day one, keep a copy of exactly what was declared, diary the thirty-day update duty, and appoint someone in France, your lawyer, your accountant (expert-comptable), your domiciliation agent, to forward any court letter arriving at the siège while you are abroad. Court mail does not wait for your next trip to Paris.

A companion question foreign founders always ask is who can manage the company and with what liability while the file is pending. The SAS is the usual answer for outsiders because “Une société par actions simplifiée peut être instituée par une ou plusieurs personnes qui ne supportent les pertes qu’à concurrence de leur apport.” One or more persons, including a single foreign individual, can form an SAS with liability limited to contributions, and the single-member version, the SASU (société par actions simplifiée unipersonnelle), works well for a solo foreign founder who wants a president with broad powers and tailor-made statuts. The SARL, governed by stricter statutory rules on managers (gérants) and share transfers (parts sociales instead of actions), suits family or small-partner projects better. Neither vehicle changes the document-authentication and RBE duties described above, so choose on governance and tax grounds, a topic covered in depth in our companion guide for foreign founders choosing between SAS, SARL, branch and subsidiary (SAS, SARL or Branch: How a Foreign Founder Chooses the Right Vehicle to Do Business in France), and treat the present article as the procedural sequel: once the vehicle is chosen, here is how the file actually passes.

B. When Your Company Legally Exists: Immatriculation, the Kbis Date and Liability Before Registration

French commercial companies acquire legal personality only upon registration, and the text is categorical: “Les sociétés commerciales jouissent de la personnalité morale à dater de leur immatriculation au registre du commerce et des sociétés.” The RCS itself is defined by Article L.123-1 of the Commercial Code, which opens with the words “Il est tenu un registre du commerce et des sociétés auquel sont immatriculés, sur leur déclaration” the listed persons and entities, including companies with their seat in a French department. Three consequences follow for a founder acting from abroad, and each of them is a source of costly misunderstanding.

First, the date on the Kbis is the legal birthday of the company, and it can differ from the date you signed the statuts or the date you filed online. The Bordeaux Court of Appeal illustrated the point on 14 January 2025, RG 24/04716, in a case where a company asked the judge supervising the RCS to order the clerk to change the Kbis registration date to an earlier day, the day after the constitution documents were filed or the day of enrolment with a professional order. The court examined the request under its supervisory powers over the register, which confirms both that the registered date matters enough to litigate and that it is fixed by the registration process, not freely chosen by the founder. For you, the lesson is operational: do not invoice, do not sign a commercial lease in the company’s name as an existing company, and do not promise a client a SIREN number before the Kbis arrives. If you must act early, have the founders act expressly in the name of the company in formation (société en formation) and list each commitment in an annex to the statuts so that registration automatically carries those commitments onto the company, a mechanism called reprise des engagements. Without that paperwork, the same Article L.210-6 warns that “Les personnes qui ont agi au nom d’une société en formation avant qu’elle ait acquis la jouissance de la personnalité morale sont tenues solidairement et indéfiniment responsables des actes ainsi accomplis”: those who acted for the unregistered company are jointly and indefinitely liable, unless the company, once registered, takes over the commitments. A founder who signs a Paris office lease from Dubai before the Kbis, without the reprise paperwork, can remain personally bound by that lease.

Second, once the greffe accepts the file, the downstream chain is automatic but not instant. INSEE issues the SIREN (Système d’identification du répertoire des entreprises, the nine-digit company identifier) and SIRET (SIREN plus five digits identifying each establishment) numbers, the BODACC publishes the creation notice, and the tax office (SIE, service des impôts des entreprises) and URSSAF (Unions de recouvrement des cotisations de sécurité sociale et d’allocations familiales, the social-security collection bodies) open their files. From abroad, monitor each step with the reference numbers on your guichet unique receipt, and react fast to any correction request: the INPI desk sets deadlines, and a file left uncorrected can lapse, forcing a fresh filing with fresh fees. Keep every filing receipt, every greffe email and the final Kbis in one shared folder with your French accountant, because the bank, the first hire’s payroll body and the VAT office will each ask for the Kbis separately, as explained in our broader setting-up guide (Setting Up a Company in France as a Foreign Founder: Bank Account, Kbis, VAT and Your First Hire).

Third, the Kbis is the key that opens the bank, but the bank has its own lock. French banks must verify beneficial owners and managers before opening a business account and depositing the share capital, and a founder outside France should expect video-identification, apostilled passport copies and questions about the origin of funds. If a bank refuses, file elsewhere and remember that capital deposited with a notary (notaire) also supports registration; the blocked-capital certificate (certificat de dépôt des fonds) from either a bank or a notary satisfies the greffe. Our dedicated guide on bank refusals details the remedies, including the right-to-an-account procedure, when a foreign founder cannot get any account at all. The point for this article is sequencing: complete the apostille, translation, domiciliation and RBE layers first, because a bank file and a greffe file that tell two different stories about who owns the company will both stall.

Conclusion

A blocked guichet unique file is rarely a substantive refusal of your business project. It is almost always a paper chain with one weak link: a birth certificate without an apostille, a parent-company resolution without a sworn translation, a domiciliation contract unsigned or mismatched with the online form, or a missing beneficial-owner declaration. Fix the chain in the order the greffe examines it, authentication then translation, registered-office proof, then owners and managers, and the Kbis follows, with the SIREN numbers, the BODACC notice and legal personality from the registration date. From that date, the company, not you personally, owns the commitments it properly takes over, provided the pre-registration acts were correctly listed for reprise. Founders who organise these four layers before clicking submit typically move from filing to Kbis in days; those who improvise discover each missing stamp one rejection at a time. Prepare the stamps first, file once, and start trading.

Source : Cour de cassation – Base Open Data « Judilibre » & « Légifrance ».

What our clients say

4,9274 Google reviews
kader ladjouzi
3 weeks ago

Best real estate and business lawyer in Paris. A compassionate and attentive lawyer, with a wonderful team. Thank you, Maître KOHEN

Translated from French

Janou SAMUEL
1 month ago

Thank you to Maître KOHEN for his analyses of recent case law regarding fraudulent concealment in real estate sales. This reinforces my decision to pursue an action for rescission that I am considering after acquiring a house affected by serious defects intentionally concealed by the seller and not reported by the real estate agent; also defects (rising damp) characterized by progressive through-cracks and damp patches, not reported by the real estate agent… Worse, defects concealed by the latter or on his initiative under a coat of paint and polystyrene tiles glued to the ceiling of a bedroom. And said real estate agent was the drafter of the preliminary contract, which naturally contains no information regarding any of these defects. I would just add that, being 77 years old and suffering from cognitive impairment, I am certain the real estate agent thought I would not be able to uncover the deception and, above all, characterize fraudulent intent, let alone initiate legal proceedings given the complexity and length of the process... That is why I am opting for criminal proceedings, insofar as the intentional concealment of defects by the seller and then by the real estate agent

Translated from French

Paul MALIK (powlo)
4 months ago

Maître Reda KOHEN assisted me in a dispute concerning a sale agreement with a defaulting party. He provided professional and responsive support, and I highly recommend him.

Translated from French

Reply from the firm

Legal advice is only valuable if it arrives on time — delighted to have been there when needed. Thank you for your kind words.

Rayan Kallout
5 months ago

I highly recommend Maître Reda Kohen. Thanks to his explanations, I was able to recover my security deposit in a situation that seemed blocked. He was responsive, clear, and very professional. A big thank you for his invaluable help!

Translated from French

Reply from the firm

The return of the security deposit is a more common rental dispute than one might think; glad that the situation was resolved quickly. Thank you for this feedback.

Naji Jouahri
5 months ago

Excellent support from Maître Kohen in a case combining business law and real estate law. Clear legal analysis from the first meeting, right through to the hearing. Professional and accessible lawyer, I highly recommend his firm in Paris 17.

Translated from French

Reply from the firm

Cases at the intersection of business law and real estate law require a comprehensive overview — that's the core of the firm's practice, from the initial meeting to the hearing. Thank you for this precise recommendation.

Halim Tunde
5 months ago

Maître Kohen assisted me in recovering unpaid debts from a defaulting tenant. Procedure mastered from start to finish, from the payment order to eviction. Human, attentive, and always reachable. Thank you for your work.

Translated from French

Reply from the firm

Collecting unpaid rent requires a procedure handled from start to finish, without downtime — glad to have seen yours through to completion. Thank you for this testimonial.

Cha
5 months ago

As a young student living in an apartment, my landlord tried to make me leave my accommodation even though he had sent me no termination notice. I therefore contacted Mr. Reda Kohen to help me as I couldn’t handle the situation alone. In just 3 days everything was resolved, Maître Kohen defended me and accompanied me with an irreproachable level of commitment and efficiency. I can only recommend his professionalism!

Translated from French

Reply from the firm

An irregular termination notice does not terminate a lease: delighted that the situation was resolved in a few days. Good luck with your studies.

Asmaa Maazaz
6 months ago

I turned to Maître Kohen for a complex real estate dispute and I highly recommend his firm. He is very professional; he thoroughly analyzed my case from the very first appointment and clearly explained the possible options. Thanks to his expertise, we achieved a very favorable outcome. Responsive, a good teacher, and committed, he is a lawyer you can truly trust. Yours faithfully, Miss Maazaz

Translated from French

Reply from the firm

Thank you very much, Miss Maazaz, for this feedback. Analytical rigor and responsiveness are essential commitments of our law firm specializing in real estate law in Paris, where each case requires a tailored approach. Delighted that we were able to achieve a favorable outcome. The firm remains at your disposal. Best regards.

chaymaa aouadi
7 months ago

I called upon Maître Reda Kohen, a real estate lawyer in Paris, and I am fully satisfied with his support. Very professional, responsive and attentive. He quickly analyzed my case, clearly explained the legal strategy and effectively defended my interests. Thanks to his expertise and determination, we obtained a very favorable outcome. I highly recommend Maître Kohen to anyone looking for a real estate lawyer in Paris.

Translated from French

Reply from the firm

A big thank you for this feedback. It is exactly this kind of return that gives full meaning to our commitment to real estate law in Paris. Your satisfaction is our best recommendation.

Fatima Arbouhi
7 months ago

Excellent real estate lawyer. Professional, responsive and attentive, he perfectly met my expectations and accompanied me with great seriousness throughout my case. I highly recommend his services.

Translated from French

Reply from the firm

Thank you for this feedback. Real estate law in Paris requires constant attention, each situation is unique and deserves support that meets the mark. Your recommendation gives us great pleasure.

Jean-François PAPA
2 days ago

Je tiens à remercier chaleureusement Maître Esther Cornu pour son professionnalisme, sa disponibilité et la qualité de son accompagnement. Dans le cadre d’un dossier particulièrement important pour mon avenir professionnel, elle a su faire preuve d’une grande réactivité, de rigueur et de pédagogie, en prenant le temps de répondre précisément à mes interrogations et de m’expliquer les différentes démarches juridiques. J’apprécie tout particulièrement la clarté de ses analyses, son sérieux et son implication dans le suivi de mon dossier. Un grand merci à Maître Esther Cornu pour son écoute et son accompagnement. Je recommande vivement !

Hamid Agouz
6 days ago

I was pleasantly surprised by the responsiveness of Monsieur Reda Cohen, who took the time to answer my questions regarding my case immediately. It has become so rare nowadays to find a lawyer who is so available, responsive, and attentive, even when it simply comes to answering inquiries. His answers are clear, precise, and reassuring. You can really feel that he takes the time to understand the situation and provide relevant answers. Beyond his excellent Google reviews, it is above all this availability and thoroughness that make all the difference. A huge thank you to Monsieur Reda Cohen for his professionalism and responsiveness. I highly recommend him!

Translated from French

Sandra Imbert
1 week ago

A huge thank you to Maître Esther Cornu from Kohen Avocats for her support during a particularly difficult time. Her attentiveness, empathy, and humanity touched me deeply. She was able to answer my questions with clarity and sensitivity, while demonstrating great professionalism and fully respecting the confidentiality of the case. Beyond her professional qualities, I met a deeply humane lawyer whose support made a real difference. I sincerely recommend her.

Translated from French

Salon Sisters
1 week ago

Thank you, Maître Kohen, for your professionalism, responsiveness, and dedication. You handled my case perfectly with great attentiveness, rigor, and efficiency. I was very satisfied with your support and the work accomplished. I recommend him without hesitation!

Translated from French

Djamel Haddouche
1 week ago

I am facing a dispute with my employer, and the support provided by Maître Hassan COHEN as well as Maître Esther Cornu is excellent. The answers are clear and well-thought-out, they genuinely listen, and interactions are very pleasant. Thank you again, I highly recommend.

Translated from French

Frederic Lopes
1 week ago

Excellent professional. I highly recommend for their dedication and expertise.

Translated from French

Nima Sdc
2 weeks ago

A law firm that is attentive to its clients. Maître Kohen and his team are very, very professional and truly master their field.

Translated from French

Amir
7 months ago

Excellent expertise in real estate law from Me Reda Kohen

Translated from French

Reply from the firm

Thank you for this feedback. Real estate law is a field that leaves no room for approximation, and it is this high standard that guides our work. Your recognition honors us.

Krep Events Traiteur Breton
3 days ago

The article is very clear.

Translated from French

TOULEIMAT HACHEM
3 days ago
emilie lepicard
1 week ago
Zakaria Airbnb
1 week ago
إبراهيم عيسى
1 week ago
Gabriele
2 weeks ago