The answer to this question is negative for several reasons. In France, conditions to legitimate self-defenses are very stringent: the response to violence must be at the same time, proportional and necessary. For example, under the strict application of law, a woman killing a violent partner at a time when he is not physically threatening her, would not be considered as legitimate self-defense.

In contrast, the trial of Angélique Lyn Lavallee in Canada led to a major change in jurisprudence about self-defense and domestic abuse. Firstly, relying on a psychiatrist testimony, the Supreme Court considered that the evidence of Lavallee suffering from battered woman syndrome was admissible, leading to the legal recognition of battered woman syndrome.

Following the Grenelle roundtable, several measures aim at protecting women and victims of violence, including in the workplace. These measures are still to be implemented, but include, among others:

• Give victims under a protective order the right to unblock their employee savings (épargne salariale) in advance on this basis.
• Integrate the issue of domestic violence into occupational health plans (plans de santé au travail) and regional occupational health plans (plans régionaux de santé au travail) in order to reduce the consequences of domestic violence in the workplace.

In France there is no legal framework for family members of domestic violence victims to take reasonable leave in order to help her, neither is it a current debate or a highly demanded measure to be pushed by social actors.

If the victim of domestic violence has a protective order (PO) against her abuser, the French law will enforce the PO on the French territory, whatever their nationality and legal status.

Moreover, according to the French law of 7 March 2016 on the Rights of Foreigners, it is mandatory for the French State to renew the residence permit of women suffering from domestic violence. 

N/A

The domestic violence law does not discuss asylum accessibility. The reception policy of immigrants has been in crisis for years in France. Within the 11 September 2018 law on controlled immigration, effective right of asylum and successful integration, the French government mentions "protecting victims of family and intimate partner violence" on its website as one of its three goals. However, this "goal" was not embodied in the 2018 law on immigration.

There is no law affirming that the application for asylum takes into account foreigners' status as victims of domestic violence, nor are victims of domestic abuse to be prioritized when seeking asylum.

The Information and Support Group for Immigrants (GISTI), a major social actor in the migration crisis, questions "To when protective measures for all women? Foreign women victims of domestic and familial abuse are often considered only as foreigners when they are firstly victims."

French law does not consider this matter.

How the judge decides on custody rights

Domestic violence does not necessarily result in the deprivation of parental authority. The family court will determine child custody, parental authority, visiting and housing rights based on the "best interests of the child" according to Article 220-1, paragraph 3 of the Civil Code. In principle, it is in the child's interests to live with her or his parents or to keep personal relationships with both parents. However, when there is a criminal judgement against the parent who committed a crime against the other parent, the criminal court may totally deprive the perpetrator of his/her parental authority (Article 378 of the Civil Code).

Pursuant to Article 378 of the Civil Code, parental authority or the exercise of parental authority may be totally withdrawn by an express decision of the criminal judgment if the parents are convicted either as perpetrators, co-perpetrators or accomplices in a crime or offence committed against the person of their child, or as co-perpetrators or accomplices in a crime or offence committed by their child, or as perpetrators, co-perpetrators or accomplices in a crime or offence committed against the person of the other parent.

Moreover, Article 378-1 of the Civil Code provides that the family court may, apart from any criminal conviction, deprive the violent parent of his/her parental authority where the child witnesses domestic violence, or when posing an obvious danger to the child's security, health or morality. In this case, the perpetrator has visiting and housing rights, but when the interest of the child requires it or when the direct handing over of the child to the violent parent presents a danger, the judge can provide that the visitation rights should be organized in a neutral place or in the presence of a trusted third party (Article 373-2-9 of the Civil Code).

Suspension of parental authority

Since the Grenelle Law, the exercise of parental authority, visiting and housing rights of the parent prosecuted or convicted, even if not definitively, for a crime committed against the other parent will be suspended automatically until the judge's decision and for a maximum period of six months, subject to the public prosecutor's obligation to refer the matter to the family court within eight days (new Article 378-2 of the Civil Code).

The law of 30 July 2020 enables the family court to suspend visiting and housing rights of a minor child for a parent placed under judicial supervision during the investigation or instruction phase.

Civil protection order

When issuing a civil protection order prohibiting the defendant from going to certain places, the judge may order that the parenting rights of the perpetrator of domestic violence are exercised in a neutral place or in the presence of a trusted third party. If he or she does not take such a decision on the exercise of parenting rights, he or she will motivate his or her decision expressly.

Obligation of child support

Regarding the parents' obligation to support their children, pursuant to Article 371-2 of the Civil Code, each parent contributes to the support and education of the children in proportion to his or her resources, those of the other parent and the needs of the child. This article specifies that the support obligation does not automatically cease either when parental authority or the exercise of parental authority is withdrawn or when the child has reached the age of majority.

Suppression of the obligation of support of a child towards its parent and of rights of inheritance

Pursuant to Article 207 of the Civil Code, a child is discharged from his or her support obligations towards his or her parent, if that parent has been convicted of a crime against the person of the other parent.

Pursuant to Article 727 of the Civil Code, the perpetrator of domestic violence against his/her partner may be declared unworthy to inherit from this partner.

According to jurisprudence, neither testimonies from children nor the other spouse have been permitted when the case involved a divorce according to the provisions of Article 205 of the Civil Code. However, the rulings of the criminal court on 21 February 2006 and 2 June 2015 indicate a reversal of this. It was ruled that for criminal cases the provisions of Article 205 of the Civil Code were not applicable. There will need to be more rulings before it is clear as to whether the court will accept the testimonies of children or the other spouse in every case or only for those that don't involve a divorce.^[45]

Note that the above information is general and doesn't relate specifically to child custody.

There are general provisions in place. According to Law No 89-462 of 6 July 1989, Article 15, if there is a legitimate and serious motive, tenants have a period of six months before they need to move out into alternative accommodation. According to Article L. 412-6 of the Civil Procedure Code, any eviction order should be suspended during the winter months (1 November-31 March the following year) in order to respect the right to stay together and the needs of a family. Also, where the perpetrator of the violence is subject to a protective order, the court can order that they pay the expenses of their dependents.^[46]

Since the law 2018-1021 of 23 November 2018 (law "ELAN"), upon separation from the abusive partner and showing a civil protection order or prosecution document, the victim no longer needs to pay rent from the date of separation or divorce. However, the victim is still responsible for paying any rent outstanding prior to the couple's date of separation.^[47]

Since the law of 30 July 2020 the tenant, if they wish to terminate the lease, only needs to give a one-month notice to the landlord (instead of three months) if:

• a civil protection order has been issued in their favor
• if the partner of the tenant is being prosecuted or has been convicted because of violence within the couple or on a child who habitually resides with him/her

When a civil protection order orders the separate residence of the spouses, the Grenelle Law establishes the primacy of the attribution of the marital home to the spouse who is not the perpetrator of the violence and the possibility, in this case, of charging the perpetrator with the cost of housing.

According to Article 220-1 of the Civil Code and the law of 26 May 2004 relating to divorce, the judge will generally always allocate the home to the victim and not the perpetrator of the violence and oblige the abuser to live outside the family home. They can also recommend that an immediate eviction of the perpetrator is arranged. Under such an order, the perpetrator of the violence forfeits any housing rights, such as the usual notice period of two months in which to vacate rented premises.^[48] The judge will place a protective order where there is a risk of any harm coming to the victim and any dependents. Articles 5 and 10 of Law 48-1360 of 1 September 1948 includes a provision for the lease to be granted to the victim in cases of domestic abuse and the perpetrator to be removed from a joint lease.

In addition, if the victim leaves the marital home, the Grenelle Law from December 2019 provides, on an experimental basis for three years, for the introduction of financial assistance for rehousing (payment of the deposit or rental guarantee, advance payment of the first months' rent, etc.).

Victims of domestic violence may request the judge to issue a civil protection order (see paragraph 4.1 above) to prohibit the defendant from possessing or carrying a weapon and, where appropriate, order them to surrender the weapons in their possession. The decision of the judge not to prohibit the possession or carrying of a weapon will be expressly motivated.

In addition, since July 2020, during an investigation into crimes of violence, the judicial police officer may seize weapons in the suspect's possession or at their free disposal, regardless of the location of the weapons.

When a protective order is issued by a judge as a result of domestic violence, does the law require that the authority must secure and store any firearms owned by the aggressor?

Yes, but only if the victim informs the authorities of the possession of the firearm. The danger level of the firearm and the seriousness of the abuse will determine whether the weapon is subject to a search warrant. Also, if the victim of the violence brings the firearm to the police station, investigators will retain it. It can be sealed as evidence for allegations of domestic violence.^[49]

However, in practice, there is evidence that this is not being enforced. For example, Julie Douib, who was shot and killed by her ex-partner on 3 March 2019, had reported on several occasions that he was in possession of a fire arm and that she feared for her life. No action was taken by the authorities.^[50]