A British parent living in France may have a child maintenance order made in England or Wales, a Child Maintenance Service assessment, or a private agreement that was workable while both parents lived in the United Kingdom. Once the paying parent, receiving parent or child is in a different country, missed payments are no longer just a family disagreement. The creditor must identify an enforceable decision, choose the correct international channel and prove the arrears in a form that French or UK authorities can use.
In France, child maintenance is commonly described as a pension alimentaire, meaning a payment made towards a child’s maintenance and education. Brexit did not abolish the obligation, but it changed the European route for new cases. The 2007 Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance now provides the main cooperation framework between France and the United Kingdom for many cross-border cases. Its operation still depends on the originating court, the child’s age, the nature of the decision and the documents available.
This article addresses the person: residence in France, the payment of maintenance, arrears, recognition and practical enforcement. It does not deal with buying French property or creating a company. The analysis is written for a British reader and distinguishes England and Wales from Scotland and Northern Ireland. The decisive first step is to classify the document before asking a French bank, employer, court, commissaire de justice (French judicial officer) or family authority to act.
I. Can a UK child maintenance order be enforced in France after Brexit?
A. Which UK decision, agreement or assessment can cross the border?
The phrase “UK child maintenance” covers several different instruments. An order from a court in England and Wales is not the same as an administrative calculation by the Child Maintenance Service (CMS). A consent order is not necessarily the same as a signed parenting agreement. A maintenance clause inside a divorce order may also need to be separated from provisions about contact, residence or the division of assets. Before selecting a procedure, obtain the complete instrument and identify who issued it, when it took effect, whether it is still enforceable and whether it fixes arrears or only future instalments.
French law starts with the continuing responsibility of both parents. Article 371-2 of the French Civil Code states: Chacun des parents contribue à l’entretien et à l’éducation des enfants à proportion de ses ressources, de celles de l’autre parent, ainsi que des besoins de l’enfant.
The English meaning is that each parent contributes in proportion to their resources, the other parent’s resources and the child’s needs. The French rule also provides that the obligation does not automatically end when a child reaches adulthood if the child is not financially independent. That domestic principle does not, by itself, turn a British assessment into a French enforcement title, but it explains why the underlying obligation is treated as a maintenance claim rather than an ordinary unsecured debt.
Article 373-2-2 of the French Civil Code identifies the forms in which a contribution may be fixed after the parents separate. It can arise from a judicial decision, an agreement approved by a judge, a divorce agreement, a notarial deed, an enforceable agreement made through the family benefits system, or certain lawyer-signed arrangements carrying an enforceable formula. This matters for a British parent because a document that records an amount without giving a court or competent authority power to review and enforce it may be useful evidence, but may not be enough for compulsory recovery in France.
A UK court order normally presents a stronger starting point than an informal agreement. The application must still establish that the order has effect and is enforceable in the United Kingdom. A certified copy of the final order, an enforceability certificate, the judgment’s operative provisions and any later variation should be gathered together. If the order was made in default, evidence of notice and the opportunity to participate can become decisive. If the order was appealed, varied or suspended, the French authority needs the updated procedural history rather than an outdated first-instance copy.
A CMS assessment requires a different question. The 2007 Hague Convention covers a decision rendered by a judicial or administrative authority, but its definition of an administrative authority requires a public body whose decision can be appealed or reviewed by a judicial authority and has a similar force and effect to a judicial decision on the same matter. Article 19 of the Convention contains that definition. A CMS case should therefore be presented with the assessment, the case reference, the statutory basis, the review or appeal position and the payment history. Do not assume that a CMS letter will be treated exactly like an English court order without the relevant authority checking it.
The Convention’s ordinary child-support scope is also important. Under Article 2, it applies to maintenance obligations arising from a parent-child relationship towards a person under 21, subject to the reservations and declarations made by the States concerned. The fact that a child is 18, 19 or 20 therefore requires a careful check of the order and the applicable law. Conversely, an order can impose a longer period under its own terms. The receiving authority must apply the originating decision’s duration rules alongside the enforcement law of the country where recovery is sought.
Brexit changed the procedural landscape from 11 p.m. on 31 December 2020. The GOV.UK guidance on UK–EU cross-border maintenance disputes explains that EU family-proceeding rules no longer apply to the United Kingdom from that time. It also distinguishes ongoing cases from new or further applications. A case already covered by the transitional arrangements may continue under the earlier route, while a new application may need the post-Brexit mechanism. The date of the proceedings, not simply the date on which the parents moved, must be recorded.
The main post-Brexit instrument is the 2007 Hague Convention. Its Article 1 describes a system of cooperation, recognition and enforcement designed for the international recovery of child support. The United Kingdom’s continuing relationship with the Convention is also reflected in the GOV.UK guidance for legal professionals, which identifies the Convention as the route used with EU States, other than Denmark, for many maintenance decisions. It is therefore wrong to say either that Brexit makes a UK order useless in France or that every order is automatically executable without a recognition step.
Finally, separate maintenance from parental responsibility. A child arrangements order regulates where a child lives or spends time and does not, by itself, calculate the amount owed. A parent may be in breach of a contact order and still remain liable for maintenance; a parent may pay maintenance and still be unable to exercise contact. A British family facing both issues should keep the files separate. A child-arrangements enforcement file concerns parental responsibility, not the arrears calculation, and should be prepared separately.
B. What route applies between France and the United Kingdom?
The direction of the application matters. If the creditor and child live in France and the debtor is in England or Wales, France is generally the requesting State and the United Kingdom is the requested State. If the creditor lives in England or Wales and the debtor has moved to France, the direction is reversed. The Convention does not ask the applicant to send an unstructured demand to whichever court appears closest. Article 9 requires an application through the Central Authority of the Contracting State in which the applicant resides, addressed to the Central Authority of the requested State.
For a creditor resident in France, the French Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs explains that its Bureau du recouvrement des créances alimentaires, or RCA, is the French Central Authority for recovery abroad. The page was updated on 3 August 2026 and warns that the Ministry is not the body for a case in which both creditor and debtor reside in France. In a France–UK file, the RCA can orient the creditor towards the procedure appropriate to the decision and the country where the debtor is located.
For a creditor using the England and Wales route, the GOV.UK guidance on a parent living abroad directs the applicant to the Maintenance Enforcement Business Centre (MEBC). GOV.UK states that the MEBC checks eligibility, supplies an application form and supporting guidance, and transmits the completed application to the court in the country where the other parent lives. The current contact details shown by GOV.UK are [email protected] and Triton House, St Andrews Street North, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk IP33 1TR. The message should identify the country of residence of both parents and the existing case reference if one exists.
Do not confuse the MEBC with the CMS. The CMS can administer some cases in which the paying parent, receiving parent and child are all within the United Kingdom, and it can have a role in particular cross-border situations. The MEBC is the route for reciprocal enforcement and transmission of international maintenance applications. The Family Procedure Rules Part 34 sets out the England and Wales court rules for reciprocal enforcement of maintenance orders, including proceedings under the 2007 Hague Convention.
The 2007 Convention gives the Central Authorities practical functions. Under Article 6 they can transmit applications, help locate a debtor, obtain information about income or assets where permitted, encourage voluntary payment, facilitate enforcement of arrears, transfer payments, obtain evidence, arrange provisional measures and facilitate service of documents. They do not replace a judge when a judicial power is required. They also do not guarantee that the debtor’s address, employer or assets will be found immediately. The applicant should therefore provide every lawful locating detail already available: former addresses, National Insurance or French identifiers where appropriate, employer name, bank information, telephone number, email address and the last known date of employment.
The Convention offers more than one type of application. A creditor can request recognition and enforcement of an existing decision, enforcement of a decision already recognised in the requested State, establishment of a new decision where no decision exists, or modification in the situations covered by the Convention. A debtor can request recognition of a decision that suspends or limits enforcement and can seek modification. This two-way structure is important: the international process is not only a debt-collection device, and a debtor who has genuinely paid, lost income or received an incorrect calculation must use the proper challenge or variation route.
The route is different where both parents and the child are now in France. The French Ministry’s cross-border service is not a substitute for the French court system in a domestic case. The creditor may need a French titre exécutoire, meaning an enforceable instrument, or a French decision varying the amount. A French juge aux affaires familiales, or JAF (family court judge), may be relevant for a domestic variation. A juge de l’exécution, or JEX (enforcement judge), may be relevant to a dispute about a compulsory measure. The correct court depends on the relief sought.
Scotland and Northern Ireland must be treated separately. GOV.UK expressly says that its England and Wales cross-border guidance does not cover cases involving the courts of Scotland or Northern Ireland. A Scottish maintenance decision or a Northern Irish order should be sent through the authority for the relevant legal system. Calling every instrument a “UK order” can send the application to the wrong central authority and cause avoidable delay.
There is also a useful distinction between legalisation and translation. Article 41 of the 2007 Convention states: No legalisation or similar formality may be required in the context of this Convention.
That does not mean that a poor scan or an unexplained document can be filed without preparation. Article 44 requires the application and related documents to be in the original language with a translation into an official language of the requested State, unless the competent authority dispenses with translation. The direction therefore matters: an application sent from France to England or Wales will generally need English-language material for the requested authority, while an application sent from England or Wales to France will generally need French-language material. Confirm the exact requirement with the RCA or MEBC. An apostille should not be demanded for the Convention application itself.
II. How should a parent recover arrears or challenge non-payment?
A. What documents, recognition steps and French measures are available?
The strongest application is organised around the exact sum claimed and the exact authority relied upon. Prepare a single indexed bundle rather than sending separate screenshots over several weeks. At minimum, the bundle should contain:
- the complete UK court order, consent order or administrative decision, including every page and schedule;
- the document confirming that the decision has effect and is enforceable in the United Kingdom;
- proof of service or notice, particularly where the debtor did not attend the original proceedings;
- all later orders, appeal outcomes, reviews, variations, suspensions or enforcement notices;
- a month-by-month arrears statement identifying the due date, original amount, indexation, payment received and balance;
- the calculation method for any interest, exchange-rate conversion or automatic increase;
- the child’s identity and date-of-birth documents and evidence of the parent-child relationship where the authority requests them;
- the creditor’s address and bank details for receipt of the money, together with any safe-contact request; and
- every document required by the requesting and requested Central Authorities, translated as requested.
These are not bureaucratic extras. Article 25 of the Convention requires, for recognition and enforcement, a complete text of the decision, proof that it is enforceable in the State of origin, evidence concerning notice where the respondent was absent, and—where necessary—a document showing the amount of arrears and the date on which it was calculated. It also addresses indexation and the extent of any legal assistance received. Article 11 adds information about the parties, the child, the grounds of the application, the payment destination and, where known, the debtor’s employer, assets and location.
Once the application reaches France, do not assume that the original English order can simply be handed to a French bank. Under Article 509 of the French Code of Civil Procedure, foreign judgments are enforceable in France in the manner and cases provided by law. Article L.111-3 of the French Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures identifies enforceable titles, including foreign judgments and acts declared enforceable. The Convention supplies a special recognition-and-enforcement route, while French internal law governs the concrete enforcement act once the title is accepted.
The Convention’s recognition stage is designed to be prompt. Under Article 23, the requested authority refers the application to the competent authority to declare the decision enforceable or register it for enforcement. A challenge or appeal is normally available within 30 days of notification, or 60 days where the contesting party is not resident in the State in which the declaration or registration was made. The grounds are limited: public policy, procedural fraud, an earlier or incompatible proceeding or decision, defective notice in a default case, breach of the Convention’s jurisdictional limits, the authenticity or integrity of specified documents, and—on past instalments—proof that the debt has already been paid.
This means that the parent resisting enforcement should read the notice immediately. A challenge is not an opportunity to reopen every factual dispute from the original case. It is an opportunity to identify a recognised Convention ground, prove payment, contest the authority or demonstrate that the documents are incomplete. A parent who simply ignores a registration decision can lose the opportunity to raise a point that had to be filed within the 30- or 60-day period.
After recognition, French enforcement can use the methods available for domestic maintenance. Article L.213-1 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures allows a creditor of a maintenance payment to seek direct payment from a third party, subject to the statutory conditions, including an enforceable decision and an unpaid instalment. Depending on the debtor’s situation, the third party can be an employer, a bank or another person holding sums for the debtor. The procedure is carried out by a French judicial officer and should be based on the recognised title and an accurate arrears schedule.
Other French measures can include seizure of bank funds, attachment of earnings, seizure and sale of assets, or recovery through public bodies where the statutory conditions are met. The Convention itself gives examples of wage withholding, bank garnishment, deductions from social-security payments, liens or forced sale, withholding of tax refunds and attachment of pension benefits. The measure must still be proportionate and legally available in France. A creditor should identify assets lawfully and avoid sending speculative allegations about hidden accounts.
Financial intermediation may provide a second route for a qualifying French case. The French arrangement known as intermédiation financière allows the family benefits bodies to receive the maintenance payment from the debtor and transmit it to the creditor. Article L.582-1 of the Social Security Code assigns the relevant role to the bodies responsible for family benefits and provides for recovery from the first missed payment in the circumstances covered by the legislation. The official Service-Public page on financial intermediation also explains that the system can concern recovery abroad and maintenance decisions made abroad, but eligibility and the supporting title must be checked.
The arrears date must be calculated with care. Article 2224 of the Civil Code provides the ordinary five-year period for personal actions, while Article L.111-4 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures addresses the time limit for enforcement of enforceable titles. The maintenance instalment, the enforcement title and the international instrument may interact in a way that cannot be reduced to one number. The Convention also says that any limit on the period for which arrears may be enforced is determined by the law of the State of origin or the State addressed, whichever provides the longer period. Obtain a legal calculation before excluding old instalments.
Criminal exposure is separate from civil recovery. Article 227-3 of the French Criminal Code defines the offence of abandoning a family where a person fails for more than two months to pay the full maintenance obligation fixed by a judicial decision or an enforceable title. The statutory wording includes en demeurant plus de deux mois sans s’acquitter intégralement de cette obligation
and provides for up to two years’ imprisonment and a €15,000 fine. A complaint does not replace the civil recognition and enforcement file, and the prosecutor will still examine the enforceability, notice, amount and intentional non-payment evidence.
French case law shows why the document chain must be complete. In Criminal Chamber judgment No. 09-84.128 of 6 January 2010, the case concerned a debtor living in Great Britain and a prosecution for abandonment of family. The official text records the lower court’s statement that le versement des pensions alimentaires ne peut être subordonné par le débiteur à l’exercice du droit de visite et d’hébergement
. The Court of Cassation ultimately quashed the conviction because the court of appeal had exceeded its powers when only the civil party had appealed a prior acquittal. This decision must not be misquoted as a complete ruling on France–UK recognition; it is useful because the proceedings also exposed the practical importance of proving enforceability, service and the precise payments due.
An older decision remains instructive on the logic of cross-border maintenance, while its treaty setting must not be confused with the current Convention. In First Civil Chamber judgment No. 84-12.914, the Court examined foreign decisions concerning an obligation towards a child under the 1958 Hague Convention. It held that that Convention did not require prior exequatur of the underlying judgment before the related maintenance decision could be examined, while still allowing control under the Convention’s conditions. The point for a modern UK–France file is methodological: identify the treaty in force for the particular application and supply the complete chain of decisions instead of assuming that one preliminary order must always be recognised separately.
When the maintenance question is mixed with spousal support, the classification may become more complex. In First Civil Chamber judgment No. 14-17.880 of 8 July 2015, published in the Bulletin, the Court applied the international rules on maintenance obligations to a compensatory benefit and required a concrete examination of international public policy. That case was not a child-support enforcement decision, so it cannot decide the present route on its own. It does show why a solicitor or French court must separate child maintenance from a spouse’s claim before selecting the Convention provisions.
Privacy and safety should be addressed at the application stage. Article 40 of the 2007 Convention allows an authority not to disclose or confirm information where disclosure could jeopardise a person’s health, safety or liberty, including in a family-violence situation. Tell the RCA or MEBC at the outset if the debtor must not receive the creditor’s current address. A request for confidentiality is not a reason to omit every locating detail; it is a reason to mark sensitive information clearly and ask the authority how it will be handled.
B. How should a debtor challenge the amount, arrears or refusal to accept payment?
A debtor who has moved to France should not stop paying because the other parent is abroad, because the currency has changed or because contact with the child has broken down. The amount remains governed by the operative order until a competent authority varies, suspends or replaces it. The first practical act is to create a payment record: date due, amount ordered, currency, amount sent, exchange rate, bank reference, receiving account and any rejected transfer. Bank statements should be preserved in their original form, with a short explanation for each discrepancy.
If the debtor receives a Convention recognition or registration notice, check the deadline first. Article 23 permits a challenge on the recognised grounds and expressly allows a respondent to rely on payment of arrears that fell due in the past. A debtor who paid directly to the other parent should produce proof that identifies the payment as maintenance, not merely a general transfer between former partners. If payments were made in pounds against an order expressed in euros, the applicable conversion method and the date of conversion should be stated rather than left to an assumption.
Notice and participation also matter. Article 22 can prevent recognition where a respondent who neither appeared nor was represented did not receive proper notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard, or proper notice of the decision and an opportunity to challenge it. This is not a licence to deny receipt of a document that was properly served. It is a requirement to put the service evidence beside the order. A debtor who changed address should explain the dates, the address recorded in the UK file and the actual date on which the proceedings became known.
The debtor can also challenge the authority or the nature of the instrument. A private agreement may not qualify as a Convention maintenance arrangement unless it was formally drawn up, registered, authenticated or filed with a competent authority capable of reviewing or modifying it. A CMS assessment should be accompanied by material demonstrating its administrative force, appeal route and current status. If the amount came from a provisional calculation, the debtor should state which later decision superseded it. The issue is not whether the document looks official; it is whether the requested State can enforce that particular document.
A change in income should be taken to the authority that can vary the decision. The 2007 Convention permits debtor applications for modification in the circumstances set out in Article 10. Article 18 also restricts certain attempts to bring modification proceedings in another Contracting State while the creditor remains habitually resident in the State where the original decision was made, subject to the Convention’s exceptions. The debtor must therefore identify the originating State, the child’s habitual residence when the order was made, the creditor’s current residence and the court or administrative body with jurisdiction before filing a variation request.
For an order that has become unaffordable because of redundancy, retirement, serious illness, disability, a new dependent child or a sustained exchange-rate change, assemble contemporaneous evidence. Include payslips, tax returns, benefit statements, employment termination documents, medical evidence where relevant, housing costs and a realistic budget. The file should distinguish a temporary cash-flow problem from a permanent change. Paying what is possible and communicating promptly does not automatically reduce the legal debt, but it can prevent the arrears schedule from becoming opaque and may help the competent authority assess an interim arrangement.
Do not set off contact disputes against maintenance. The reasoning recorded in judgment No. 09-84.128 states that payment cannot be made conditional by the debtor on exercising visiting and accommodation rights, although the ultimate cassation in that case rested on a separate procedural defect. If the other parent prevents contact, that issue must be raised through the parental-responsibility or child-arrangements route. Withholding maintenance can expose the debtor to civil enforcement and, where the legal elements are met, a criminal complaint.
If a French commissaire de justice starts direct payment or seizure, read the notice and identify the title, the creditor, the period covered and the amount claimed. Article L.213-1 concerns direct payment; other enforcement acts may have their own objection periods and must be challenged before the competent enforcement judge. A dispute about whether the debt exists is not always decided in the same way as a dispute about whether the measure was carried out correctly. Send the enforcement officer a concise payment ledger and seek advice on the exact court and deadline.
Financial intermediation can also generate a dispute. If the CAF or another family-benefits body claims that sums remain unpaid despite direct transfers, the debtor should provide proof to the intermediary and compare the period of intermediation with the period claimed. The official Service-Public guidance on intermédiation financière indicates that a challenge can be brought before the enforcement judge in the situations described by the scheme. The file should state whether the payment went to the other parent, to the intermediary, to a designated account or was returned by the bank.
A recognition dispute is not the only way to correct the future amount. If the debtor accepts that the original order was valid but the circumstances have materially changed, the appropriate request is usually a variation, not a defence based on alleged non-recognition. The debtor should not ask a French bank to stop a valid seizure merely because a variation application has been prepared. Ask the court or authority whether an interim suspension is available and provide evidence of urgency, essential living costs and any risk of irreparable harm.
The 2007 Convention’s cooperation system also protects access to procedure. Article 14 requires effective access to enforcement and appeal procedures, and Article 15 provides free legal assistance for many applications concerning maintenance arising from a parent-child relationship towards a person under 21, subject to the Convention’s conditions. A British parent in France should ask the RCA, MEBC or competent court how legal aid is assessed in the actual route. Eligibility for assistance is not the same as a guarantee that every private solicitor’s fee will be recovered.
Finally, keep the international file consistent with the child’s real situation. If the child has moved, reached a new educational stage, become financially independent or is now supported by the other parent, those facts may affect a variation under the applicable law. They do not erase historic instalments automatically. The correct approach is to date each change, identify which authority can act and ask for a formal decision. A parent should never rely on an email saying that payments can stop when the operative order has not been changed.
Conclusion
A UK child maintenance order can remain useful in France after Brexit, but it must travel through the correct legal channel. Start by identifying whether the document is a court order, a CMS decision, an approved agreement or only a private arrangement. Then determine the direction of the case, the relevant legal territory in the United Kingdom and whether the 2007 Hague Convention applies. For a creditor in France, the French RCA is the practical starting point for a cross-border recovery request; for a creditor using the England and Wales route, the MEBC provides the international application route.
The result depends on evidence. Supply the complete decision, proof of enforceability, notice documents, a precise arrears ledger, translations and safe-contact instructions. Once recognition or registration is obtained, French tools such as direct payment, seizure and financial intermediation may become available. A debtor should not ignore a notice: the 30- or 60-day challenge periods, proof of payment and the proper variation route can determine whether the claimed sum is enforced as stated.
Maintenance and contact remain separate obligations. A cross-border family needs one coherent record for the order, one calculation for the arrears and a formal application to the authority able to vary or enforce the decision. That preparation is usually the quickest way to turn a post-Brexit dispute into an actionable France–UK file.
Need a quick opinion on your case
A telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer from the firm can help you identify the correct France–UK enforcement route, test the order’s enforceability and organise an arrears or challenge file.
We can also review a CMS assessment, a French enforcement notice, a recognition deadline or evidence that payments have already been made.
Call +33 6 46 60 58 22 or contact the firm online.