Introduction

Exiled to the desolate island of Saint Helena, Napoleon Bonaparte pondered on one September evening in 1816: “Waterloo will wipe out the memory of my forty victories; but that which nothing can wipe out is my Civil Code. That will live forever.” These thoughts have proven to be visionary. His Civil Code is not only still applicable in France, Belgium and Luxembourg, it has also influenced codifications all over the world. Now, 200 years after his dramatic defeat in the Battle of Waterloo, the law of obligations as reflected in the French Civil Code will be modernised. This modernization is necessary as the law of obligations in the Civil Code has been left virtually unchanged since its adoption in 1804. The reform will not, however, put the Code's vocation to eternity to rest. On the contrary, its purpose is rather to re-establish the prestige of the French Civil Code as the cornerstone of French private law and a model for other jurisdictions.

On 11 February 2016, just a few days before the constitutional deadline, ordonnance n° 2016–131 portant reforme du droit des contrats, du regime general et de la preuve des obligations was published. With this ordinance, the French government modified the law of obligations in the French Civil Code. The authority to modify the Civil Code was awarded by Parliament through the Loi nr. 2015–177 relative a la modernisation et a la simplification du droit et des procedures dans les domaines de la justice et des affaires interieures, which was published on 17 February 2015. This act was adopted after a long procedural stand-off between the French government and the National Assembly on the one hand, and the Senate on the other hand. Pursuant to Article 8 of that act, the French government could by ordinance change the law in book III of the Civil Code in order to “moderniser, de simplifi er, d'ameliorer la lisibilite, de renforcer l'accessibilite du droit commun des contrats, du regime des obligations et du droit de la preuve, de garantir la securite juridique et l'efficacite de la norme.”

3. Although a reform had been discussed before (Chapter 2), it would take until the turn of the millennium until the call for reform finally gained momentum.