End of an era for the formula "in any event within the national territory and during a time not covered by the limitation period"

Article restored from the May 2024 archive - to be updated in light of subsequent rulings.

The phrase "during a time not covered by the limitation period", traditionally added to the period of the facts targeted by the charges, has no effect on the jurisdiction of the trial court. Except in cases of formal rectification, the judge cannot rule on facts committed on dates not mentioned in the charges without the defendant's express consent.

A formula long used by the prosecution

For decades, direct summonses and committal orders have systematically included the phrase "in any event within the national territory and during a time not covered by the limitation period". This boilerplate clause was intended to give the trial court broader jurisdiction, allowing it in theory to rule on facts whose exact date or precise location were not known at the time of referral.

The principle of in rem jurisdiction

The criminal court is seized in rem, that is, of the facts as described in the charging document. Judges may only rule on the facts mentioned in the act of referral, on pain of violating the adversarial principle and the rights of the defence.

The evolution of case law

The Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation now considers that the phrase "during a time not covered by the limitation period" does not extend jurisdiction beyond the period expressly targeted. For a fact committed on a different date to be tried, two conditions must be met: a formal rectification of the charges, or the express consent of the defendant to being tried on those additional facts.

Practical consequences for the defence

This development reinforces the lawyer's role in monitoring the scope of the charges. At the hearing, the defence must:

• check the consistency between the facts debated and those targeted in the charges;
• oppose any implicit extension of jurisdiction;
• where appropriate, refuse to consent to being tried on facts not targeted;
• raise nullity or seek an adjournment in case of debate on facts outside the period.

The role of the criminal defence lawyer

Charles Bruguière, Esq., appears before criminal courts to monitor the regularity of the court's seisin and to raise defences linked to the wording of the charges.

Source

Brief published on Dalloz Actualité (May 2024).