You moved to France for a shared life, not for a courtroom. Then your partner hits you, threatens you, controls every message you send, or follows you after you left, and you are a British citizen wondering whether French law protects you at all now that Britain has left the European Union, whether calling the police could cost you your home, your children or your right to stay. The short answer is that it does not cost you any of those things: French law gives any victim living in France the same emergency protection whatever passport she or he holds, and Brexit did not remove a single one of those shields.<\/p>\n
This article explains the two tracks you must use together. The criminal track starts with a plainte, which is the formal criminal complaint you file with the police or the gendarmerie, and can put your attacker before the tribunal correctionnel, which is the criminal court that tries offences carrying up to ten years of imprisonment. The civil track runs before the juge aux affaires familiales, usually shortened to JAF, which is the family court judge who can issue an ordonnance de protection, meaning a protection order, within days, give you the home, organise the children, and open the door to a residence permit even if your right to stay depended on the violent partner. Each rule below comes with the exact article of the French codes, three published decisions of the Cour de cassation, which is France’s highest court for civil and criminal cases, and the official British and French guidance, followed by the remedies where the police, the pr\u00e9fecture or a court says no.<\/p>\n
Call 3919 first if you need advice before you act. That number, confirmed on the official English-language service-public page on domestic violence, is the national helpline on violence against women, a helpline call charged at no cost to you that provides a first-level response and directs or forwards you to a useful number. In an emergency call 17 for the police or 15 for medical help. You can then walk into any commissariat de police or brigade de gendarmerie anywhere in France: the police must take your plainte, and they cannot refuse on the ground that you are British, that your French is poor, or that you have no residence card on you. Ask for an interpreter; in practice large stations arrange one by telephone, and your statement is written down, read back and signed. Insist on a plainte rather than a main courante, which is a mere entry in the police logbook that triggers no investigation: only the plainte sets the criminal process in motion and only the plainte supports the residence rights explained in Part II.<\/p>\n
Before or just after filing, get examined. Ask the police for a r\u00e9quisition, which is the written order sending you to the UMJ, the unit\u00e9 m\u00e9dico-judiciaire, meaning the forensic medical unit that records injuries for the courts, or go to hospital accident and emergency and ask for a certificat m\u00e9dical describing every injury. The doctor fixes an ITT, which stands for incapacit\u00e9 totale de travail, literally total incapacity for work, but which in this context is simply the standard medical yardstick French courts use to grade violence, even for a victim who does not work. The number of ITT days decides the classification: violence causing eight days or less, or none at all, falls under Article 222-13 of the Criminal Code<\/a>, which states that “Les violences ayant entra\u00een\u00e9 une incapacit\u00e9 de travail inf\u00e9rieure ou \u00e9gale \u00e0 huit jours ou n’ayant entra\u00een\u00e9 aucune incapacit\u00e9 de travail sont punies de trois ans d’emprisonnement et de 45 000 euros d’amende lorsqu’elles sont commises”, followed by the list of aggravating circumstances. Keep every photograph, message, threat, medical paper and witness name from day one, because the family judge and the criminal court both decide on papers, and the victim who arrives with dated exhibits wins far more often than the one who arrives with memories alone.<\/p>\n Two aggravating circumstances matter most for British victims. First, the spouse or partner link itself aggravates the offence: Article 222-13 lists as an aggravating item, in the words of Article 222-13 of the Criminal Code<\/a>, “6\u00b0 Par le conjoint ou le concubin de la victime ou le partenaire li\u00e9 \u00e0 la victime par un pacte civil de solidarit\u00e9”, so hitting a wife, husband, civil partner or live-in partner is punished more severely than the same blow against a stranger. Second, the general rule of Article 132-80 of the Criminal Code<\/a> provides that “Dans les cas respectivement pr\u00e9vus par la loi ou le r\u00e8glement, les peines encourues pour un crime, un d\u00e9lit ou une contravention sont aggrav\u00e9es lorsque l’infraction est commise par le conjoint, le concubin ou le partenaire li\u00e9 \u00e0 la victime par un pacte civil de solidarit\u00e9, y compris lorsqu’ils ne cohabitent pas”. Note the closing words: living apart changes nothing, and the protection covers a former partner too, as the next section shows. Repeated degrading behaviour without blows is a separate offence: Article 222-33-2-2 of the Criminal Code<\/a> punishes the act of harassing a person “par des propos ou comportements r\u00e9p\u00e9t\u00e9s ayant pour objet ou pour effet une d\u00e9gradation de ses conditions de vie se traduisant par une alt\u00e9ration de sa sant\u00e9 physique ou mentale”, with one year of imprisonment and a 15,000 euro fine at the lowest level. Coercive control, insults, surveillance of your telephone and cutting you off from friends fit this text, and you should report them in the plainte alongside any physical attack.<\/p>\n The ordonnance de protection is the fastest shield in French law, and it is open to you exactly as to a French victim. Article 515-9 of the Civil Code<\/a> provides: “Lorsque les violences exerc\u00e9es au sein du couple, y compris lorsqu’il n’y a pas de cohabitation, ou par un ancien conjoint, un ancien partenaire li\u00e9 par un pacte civil de solidarit\u00e9 ou un ancien concubin, y compris lorsqu’il n’y a jamais eu de cohabitation, mettent en danger la personne qui en est victime ou un ou plusieurs enfants, le juge aux affaires familiales peut d\u00e9livrer en urgence \u00e0 cette derni\u00e8re une ordonnance de protection.” Three points count for a British reader. The text covers couples who never lived together and former partners who never cohabited, so an ex-boyfriend who stalks you after a short relationship is caught. The judge needs danger plus plausibility, not a criminal conviction: Article 515-11 of the Civil Code<\/a> states that “L’ordonnance de protection est d\u00e9livr\u00e9e, par le juge aux affaires familiales, dans un d\u00e9lai maximal de six jours \u00e0 compter de la fixation de la date de l’audience, s’il estime, au vu des \u00e9l\u00e9ments produits devant lui et contradictoirement d\u00e9battus, qu’il existe des raisons s\u00e9rieuses de consid\u00e9rer comme vraisemblables”, namely the alleged violence and the danger. And the official English guidance confirms that the measures can later be prolonged where divorce, separation or parental-authority proceedings are filed before the family judge. File the request at the tribunal judiciaire, which is the main civil and criminal court of each area, of your home; the six-day clock runs from the fixing of the hearing date, so lodge the exhibits with the request rather than posting them afterwards.<\/p>\n What the judge can order goes far beyond telling the attacker to stay away. The judge can forbid any contact and any visit to the places you frequent, order the surrender of weapons, offer the violent party medical or psychological care, decide that the spouses live apart, and rule on parental authority, visiting rights and money for the household. The most concrete measure for a victim who fears losing her roof is the home itself: Article 515-11 of the Civil Code<\/a> continues that “La jouissance du logement conjugal est attribu\u00e9e, sauf ordonnance sp\u00e9cialement motiv\u00e9e justifi\u00e9e par des circonstances particuli\u00e8res, au conjoint qui n’est pas l’auteur des violences, et ce m\u00eame s’il a b\u00e9n\u00e9fici\u00e9 d’un h\u00e9bergement d’urgence.” In plain English, the victim keeps the family home by default even if she spent nights in emergency shelter, and the violent partner can be ordered to leave immediately, by force if needed. The same default applies to unmarried couples and civil partners for the shared home. All these measures run for up to twelve months: Article 515-12 of the Civil Code<\/a> states that “Les mesures mentionn\u00e9es \u00e0 l’article 515-11 sont prises pour une dur\u00e9e maximale de douze mois \u00e0 compter de la notification de l’ordonnance”, with prolongation available once divorce or parental-authority proceedings are on foot. Ask the judge in the same request for the home, the children, the money and the weapons points together; victims who ask only for a no-contact order often have to return to court for the rest.<\/p>\n The courts apply these texts with real force, including where the attacker claims to be the true victim. In its judgment of 10 February 2021, pourvoi No 19-22.793, the First Civil Chamber of the Cour de cassation upheld a protection order that gave the wife the home and its furniture, ordered the husband to leave at once with expulsion by public force if needed, and forbade each spouse from disturbing the other, even though the husband produced his own complaint, his own medical certificate and arguments about money and depression. The Court recalled that the order is issued where there are serious reasons to regard the alleged violence and the danger as plausible, and held that “c’est dans l’exercice de son pouvoir souverain que la cour d’appel, qui a examin\u00e9 les d\u00e9p\u00f4ts de plainte effectu\u00e9s par les deux parties et les certificats m\u00e9dicaux vers\u00e9s aux d\u00e9bats, sans \u00eatre tenue de s’expliquer sur les pi\u00e8ces qu’elle d\u00e9cidait d’\u00e9carter ni de suivre les parties dans le d\u00e9tail de leur argumentation, a estim\u00e9 que le prononc\u00e9 d’une ordonnance de protection \u00e9tait justifi\u00e9.” Read the full decision at Cour de cassation, First Civil Chamber, 10 February 2021, No 19-22.793<\/a>. The lesson is practical: bring both complaints and both medical certificates to the hearing, because the judge weighs the two files side by side, and file your own plainte early so the attacker’s complaint does not stand alone.<\/p>\n Children are protected through you, and the judge does not need a separate danger finding for each child. In its judgment of 23 May 2024, pourvoi No 22-22.600, the same Chamber approved an order forbidding a husband from meeting or contacting the couple’s child outside organised visiting rights and from coming to the home where the wife lived with the child, although the attacker argued that no danger to the child itself had been proved. The Court stated: “Il r\u00e9sulte de ces textes que, lorsque le juge aux affaires familiales estime qu’il existe des raisons s\u00e9rieuses de consid\u00e9rer comme vraisemblables la commission des faits de violence all\u00e9gu\u00e9s et le danger auquel est expos\u00e9e la victime et que celle-ci est parent d’un ou plusieurs enfants, il peut, pour assurer sa protection, interdire \u00e0 la partie d\u00e9fenderesse de recevoir ou de rencontrer le ou les enfants, ainsi que d’entrer en relation avec eux, de quelque fa\u00e7on que ce soit, autrement qu’\u00e0 l’occasion du droit de visite qu’il lui a, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, accord\u00e9, et de se rendre au domicile familial o\u00f9 la victime demeure avec eux.” Full text at Cour de cassation, First Civil Chamber, 23 May 2024, No 22-22.600<\/a>. For a British mother this means one request can secure the home, a no-contact rule covering the children, and visiting rights organised safely, for example at a neutral venue, instead of informal handovers that become new flashpoints. Where the children are in real danger the judge also alerts the procureur de la R\u00e9publique, which is the public prosecutor, for child-protection steps.<\/p>\n Many British victims hesitate to report because their residence paperwork runs through the attacker: a Withdrawal Agreement card as the family member of an EU-citizen spouse, or a French card through marriage to a French national. French and treaty law both answer that leaving a violent partner does not mean leaving France. Start with the treaty shield. Article 13 of the Withdrawal Agreement<\/a> keeps family members’ residence rights by reference to Directive 2004\/38\/EC, providing that family members who are United Kingdom nationals keep the right to reside in the host State under the conditions of Directive 2004\/38\/EC, including its Article 13 on retained residence after divorce. The cross-reference to Article 13 of the Directive is the point that matters: under that provision divorce or annulment does not end a family member’s residence where the marriage lasted at least three years with one year in the host state, where custody of the children was granted, or where particularly difficult circumstances exist, expressly including having suffered domestic violence while the marriage subsisted. A British spouse who divorces a French or EU husband after documented violence therefore keeps an independent right to stay, and the pr\u00e9fecture, which is the local state authority that issues residence permits, cannot treat the end of the marriage as the end of residence.<\/p>\n French domestic law adds two direct shields for holders of French permits. Article L425-6 of the CESEDA<\/a>, which is the code governing entry and residence of foreign nationals, provides that “L’\u00e9tranger qui b\u00e9n\u00e9ficie d’une ordonnance de protection en vertu de l’article 515-9 du code civil, en raison des violences exerc\u00e9es au sein du couple ou par un ancien conjoint, un ancien partenaire li\u00e9 par un pacte civil de solidarit\u00e9 ou un ancien concubin se voit d\u00e9livrer, dans les plus brefs d\u00e9lais, une carte de s\u00e9jour temporaire mention ” vie priv\u00e9e et familiale ” d’une dur\u00e9e d’un an.” The protection order therefore converts directly into a one-year permit, renewed automatically while the order lasts, and renewed throughout the criminal proceedings once you have filed a plainte, even after the order itself expires. Separately, Article L423-5 of the CESEDA<\/a> provides that “La rupture de la vie commune n’est pas opposable lorsqu’elle est imputable \u00e0 des violences familiales ou conjugales”, so a pr\u00e9fecture cannot refuse or withdraw your card on the ground that you no longer live with the spouse who beat you. Practical sequence: obtain the ordonnance de protection, file the plainte, then apply at the pr\u00e9fecture with the order, the complaint receipt and any medical certificates, and challenge any refusal by recours gracieux, which is the informal appeal to the pr\u00e9fet that costs nothing to lodge, followed by the tribunal administratif, which is the administrative court, within two months.<\/p>\n British victims who already hold a Withdrawal Agreement residence card in their own right, the familiar WARP card, are in the strongest position of all, because that card depends on your own residence before the end of the transition period, not on staying with anyone. Divorce, separation and a change of address do not cancel it, though you must still update your address and keep the card valid. Where the pr\u00e9fecture questions continued residence, answer with the same bundle every time: passport, WARP card, proof of address in France, the protection order, the plainte receipt, and, for family members relying on retained rights, the divorce petition or custody papers. Never surrender your passport or your WARP card to a partner, a family member or anyone who claims the pr\u00e9fecture needs the originals through them; the pr\u00e9fecture deals with you directly, and confiscation of your documents by a partner is itself a fact to report in the plainte. In Paris and the \u00cele-de-France region the only difference is volume: pr\u00e9fecture appointments run slower, the Paris family court sits at the tribunal judiciaire de Paris, and large police stations have social workers attached, so book the pr\u00e9fecture slot online the day you receive the protection order rather than waiting for the criminal case to move.<\/p>\n Leaving does not end the danger, and French criminal law follows the attacker after the separation. The key decision is the judgment of the Criminal Chamber of 2 May 2024, pourvoi No 23-85.986, which quashed an appeal ruling that had refused to treat a former cohabiting partner as an aggravating circumstance because the violence concerned the handover of the couple’s child rather than the old relationship. The Cour de cassation held: “Il r\u00e9sulte de ce texte que la commission d’une infraction par l’ancien conjoint, concubin ou partenaire li\u00e9 par un pacte civil de solidarit\u00e9 constitue une circonstance aggravante, d\u00e8s lors que cette infraction est commise en raison des relations ayant exist\u00e9 entre l’auteur des faits et la victime.” Since the judges had themselves found that the facts related to the care of the shared child, the violence necessarily stemmed from the former couple’s relationship, and the aggravation applied. Read it at Cour de cassation, Criminal Chamber, 2 May 2024, No 23-85.986<\/a>. Report every post-separation incident, including threats by message and ambushes at handover, by supplementary plainte that refers to the first complaint number, because repetition founds both the harassment offence and a stricter sentence.<\/p>\n Children who see the violence are protected twice. First, the sentence rises where a child watches: Article 222-13 raises the penalty to five years of imprisonment and a 75,000 euro fine where the offence is committed while a child is present and the attacker is the victim’s spouse, cohabiting partner or civil partner. Second, the children’s own living arrangements are reorganised around safety rather than habit: Article 373-2-9 of the Civil Code<\/a> lets the family judge fix the child’s residence with one parent and set the other parent’s visiting rights, and within a protection order the judge can suspend ordinary contact in favour of organised visits. Ask expressly for a neutral handover point, for visits in a supervised setting where needed, and for school and medical records to note who may collect the child; British parents should also tell the school in writing that the violent parent may not take the children home, with a copy of the order attached. Where the attacker removes the children or refuses to return them, file a plainte for non-representation d’enfant, which is the offence of refusing to hand a child to the person entitled to custody, alongside the request to the family judge.<\/p>\n Where the system stalls, challenge it in writing at each level. If the prosecutor closes the file, the classement sans suite, which is the decision to take no further action, must be notified to you with reasons, and you can appeal to the procureur g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, which is the senior prosecutor at the court of appeal, then file a complaint with constitution de partie civile, meaning you join the criminal case as a civil party claiming damages, before the doyen des juges d’instruction, which forces the appointment of an investigating judge. If the family judge refuses the protection order, appeal to the cour d’appel, which is the appeal court, within the time limit printed on the decision, with fresh exhibits on any new incident. If the pr\u00e9fecture refuses or withdraws your permit, combine the recours gracieux to the pr\u00e9fet with a r\u00e9f\u00e9r\u00e9 before the tribunal administratif where removal is threatened. If the police refuse to record a plainte, which the law forbids, ask for the refusal in writing, note the officer’s number, date and time, and report it to the commissaire, to the D\u00e9fenseur des droits, which is the independent rights ombudsman, and in a letter to the prosecutor; stations record complaints properly once the prosecutor asks why a victim was turned away. The English-language official page on domestic violence on service-public.fr<\/a> summarises the court protection route and confirms the 3919 helpline, and it is the page to send to any British friend or relative who doubts that the French system will act.<\/p>\n A British victim of partner violence in France holds three shields that Brexit left untouched, and they work only when used together and early. The civil shield is the ordonnance de protection: danger plus plausible evidence brings an order within days giving you the home by default, a no-contact rule that can cover the children, organised visiting rights and up to twelve months of cover, renewable once divorce or custody proceedings start. The criminal shield is the plainte: it triggers investigation and trial, the spouse or ex-partner link aggravates every offence even without cohabitation, post-separation violence over the children keeps that aggravation, and harassment without blows is an offence of its own. The residence shield is the treaty and the CESEDA: the Withdrawal Agreement preserves the family member’s right to stay through divorce in cases of domestic violence, the protection order converts into a one-year private and family life permit renewed through the criminal case, and no pr\u00e9fecture can hold the end of shared life against a victim of family or conjugal violence. File the plainte, request the order, see a doctor, photograph everything, apply for the permit with the full bundle, and contest every refusal in writing within its deadline, because each paper you file becomes the exhibit that makes the next judge act.<\/p>\n Our firm offers a telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer of the firm to review your protection order request, your complaint, your children’s arrangements or your residence position after separation. First telephone consultation: 80 EUR including VAT. Call 06 46 60 58 22<\/a>, or write via our contact page<\/a> with your town in France, your residence permit, the date of the violence, any medical certificates, and any decision from the police, the family judge or the pr\u00e9fecture that you wish to challenge.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Attacked or controlled by a partner in France after Brexit? A British victim can get a protection order within days, keep the home, organise the children, keep residence rights and challenge any refusal, with the exact articles and court decisions.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":4156,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kj_source_type":"","_kj_official_id":"","_kj_official_url":"","_kj_judilibre_id":"","_kj_jur":"","_kj_lieu":"","_kj_chambre":"","_kj_rg":"","_kj_date":"","activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","footnotes":""},"categories":[80312,80314],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2131204","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-british-desk","category-decryptage"],"yoast_head":"\nB. How the family judge protects you in six days: the ordonnance de protection and what it can order<\/h3>\n
II. Staying in your French home afterwards: residence rights, the criminal trial and how to challenge a refusal<\/h2>\n
A. Keeping your right to stay in France when the violent partner was your route to residence<\/h3>\n
B. Making the criminal case work after separation: ex-partner violence, children as witnesses and contesting a classement sans suite<\/h3>\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n
Need a quick opinion on your case<\/h2>\n