Executive Summary
A foreign request for evidence can place a French company between two legal systems.
In the United States, discovery may require parties to identify and produce documents relevant to litigation, including documents that may harm their own position. English disclosure rules also require parties, depending on the applicable procedure, to identify and make available relevant documents under court supervision and proportionality requirements.
For a French company, however, receiving a foreign request does not mean that documents should automatically be transmitted.
French Blocking Statute Law No. 68-678 of July 26, 1968, the 1970 Hague Evidence Convention, the GDPR, and the French economic security procedure involving the SISSE may all affect how the request should be handled.
The practical lesson is simple: cross-border evidence production is no longer merely a litigation task. It is a compliance, data protection, sovereignty, and information-governance issue.
A company should therefore qualify the request before answering it, identify sensitive information, determine the appropriate cooperation channel, and document every decision.
Quick Answer: Can a French Company Simply Comply With a U.S. Discovery Request?
Not necessarily.
A French company should first determine what information is requested, why it is requested, who is requesting it, whether personal data or strategically sensitive information is involved, and which international cooperation mechanism applies.
French law does not prohibit all cooperation with foreign courts.
It does, however, regulate certain requests for economic, commercial, industrial, financial, or technical information intended for foreign proceedings.
The safest approach is therefore neither automatic disclosure nor automatic refusal.
It is structured legal review.
Why Cross-Border Evidence Creates a Conflict of Laws
International litigation increasingly involves evidence stored across multiple jurisdictions.
Emails may be hosted in France.
Corporate records may sit on a European cloud server.
Employees may be located in several countries.
A U.S. litigation team may request documents from a French subsidiary, while the French company remains subject to French and European rules governing disclosure.
The difficulty is that different legal systems do not approach evidence in the same way.
U.S. discovery can be relatively broad.
English disclosure is structured around documents relevant to the issues in dispute and is subject to proportionality and judicial case management.
French civil procedure traditionally operates with a narrower conception of evidence production.
When these systems meet, the company may face conflicting obligations.
What Is the French Blocking Statute?
French Law No. 68-678 of July 26, 1968 is commonly known as the French Blocking Statute.
Its purpose is not to prevent all international judicial cooperation.
It protects French sovereignty and regulates certain transfers of business information to foreign authorities or for foreign proceedings.
Article 1
Article 1 restricts the communication to foreign public authorities of certain economic, commercial, industrial, financial, or technical information where disclosure could harm French sovereignty, security, essential economic interests, or public order.
Article 1 bis
Article 1 bis addresses evidence gathering more directly.
Subject to applicable treaties, international agreements, laws, and regulations, it restricts requesting, seeking, or communicating economic, commercial, industrial, financial, or technical information for the purpose of constituting evidence in foreign judicial or administrative proceedings.
This makes the manner in which evidence is collected important.
A document may be relevant to foreign litigation and still require a specific legal channel before it can be transmitted.
The Role of the SISSE
The French framework became more operational in 2022.
Decree No. 2022-207 of February 18, 2022 clarified the notification process involving the Service de l'information stratégique et de la sécurité économiques, known as the SISSE.
Where a request falls within the Blocking Statute framework, the relevant company may need to inform the SISSE.
The SISSE can then assess whether Articles 1 or 1 bis apply.
This provides companies with an institutional mechanism for evaluating sensitive foreign evidence requests rather than leaving the decision entirely to internal legal teams.
For multinational groups, this means that a foreign subpoena, discovery request, regulator request, or evidence demand should trigger an escalation process before documents leave France.
The Hague Evidence Convention
The 1970 Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters provides an international cooperation framework.
It creates mechanisms through which evidence can be obtained across borders, including Letters of Request and certain procedures involving diplomatic or consular agents or commissioners.
For French companies, the Convention can provide a structured alternative to direct evidence gathering.
The important point is procedural.
The question is not merely whether the foreign litigant is entitled to evidence.
The question is also how that evidence should lawfully be obtained.
GDPR Article 48 Adds Another Layer
Cross-border evidence requests often contain personal data.
Employee emails, customer records, internal correspondence, HR files, investigation reports, and transaction documents may all contain information relating to identifiable individuals.
Article 48 of the GDPR specifically addresses judgments and decisions of courts or administrative authorities in third countries requiring transfers or disclosure of personal data.
Such decisions are not automatically recognized or enforceable in Europe merely because they were issued abroad.
International agreements and the GDPR's wider international-transfer framework must also be considered.
This means that a foreign court order does not eliminate European data protection analysis.
U.S. Discovery and French Companies
U.S. discovery can involve document requests, interrogatories, depositions, subpoenas, and electronically stored information.
For multinational companies, the difficulty is often technological.
A U.S. parent company may technically have access to data stored by a French subsidiary.
That technical access does not necessarily answer the legal question of whether the information may be collected and transferred.
Legal teams should therefore map:
- where the documents are stored;
- which entity controls them;
- whether they contain personal data;
- whether French strategic interests are implicated;
- whether privilege applies;
- and whether a formal international cooperation procedure should be used.
The ability to click “export” is not the same as the legal right to disclose.
What About Disclosure in England and Wales?
English civil litigation also contains extensive document disclosure mechanisms.
In the Business and Property Courts, disclosure is organized around the issues in dispute, documents within the parties' control, known adverse documents, proportionality, and judicial case management.
Electronic records are included within the concept of documents.
For French companies involved in English proceedings, the same cross-border analysis therefore arises.
The procedural system requesting evidence may be different from U.S. discovery, but the French company must still determine whether producing information from France complies with French and European law.
The Real Risk: Treating Evidence Production as an Administrative Task
A foreign document request can look operational.
Search the mailbox.
Export the files.
Send them to external counsel.
That approach can be dangerous.
Before evidence is transferred, legal teams should ask:
- Which legal system issued the request?
- Is the requesting entity a court, authority, litigant, or private party?
- Where is the evidence located?
- Who legally controls it?
- Does the Blocking Statute apply?
- Should the SISSE be informed?
- Does the evidence contain personal data?
- Is privilege involved?
- Can the Hague Evidence Convention be used?
- What should be documented if disclosure is limited or refused?
Cross-border evidence production is therefore a governance process.
Practical Checklist for Legal Departments
When a foreign evidence request reaches a French company:
1. Freeze relevant evidence
Preserve potentially relevant documents while avoiding unnecessary copying or transfer.
2. Map the information
Identify custodians, systems, jurisdictions, personal data, confidential information, and trade secrets.
3. Identify the legal basis of the request
Distinguish between discovery, disclosure, a subpoena, a regulator request, a foreign court order, and an informal lawyer request.
4. Review French Blocking Statute implications
Determine whether Articles 1 or 1 bis may apply.
5. Consider SISSE notification
Where the statutory framework applies, activate the appropriate French procedure.
6. Review GDPR requirements
Assess Article 48 and the broader international-transfer framework where personal data is involved.
7. Consider international judicial cooperation
Determine whether the Hague Evidence Convention or another treaty mechanism offers the appropriate route.
8. Apply proportionality
Avoid transferring information that is irrelevant, excessive, privileged, or outside the lawful scope of the request.
9. Document the decision
Preserve the reasoning supporting disclosure, limitation, redaction, or refusal.
Final Analysis
The central problem in cross-border evidence production is not cooperation versus obstruction.
It is lawful cooperation.
A French company cannot assume that a foreign procedural request overrides French sovereignty rules, European data protection law, or international judicial cooperation mechanisms.
At the same time, simply refusing a valid foreign request can create serious litigation consequences.
The legal department's role is therefore to build a bridge between legal systems.
The best response is rarely “send everything” or “send nothing.”
It is to identify the right information, the right legal basis, the right cooperation channel, and the right level of protection.
In international litigation, the way evidence is obtained can become almost as important as the evidence itself.
Does the French Blocking Statute prohibit all discovery requests?
No. It does not prohibit all international evidence cooperation. It regulates certain requests and communications and must be read together with applicable international agreements and procedural mechanisms.
What is the SISSE's role?
The SISSE is the French economic security service involved in assessing certain requests falling within the French Blocking Statute framework and can issue an opinion on whether the statute applies.
Can a U.S. court order automatically require a French company to transfer personal data?
Not automatically. GDPR Article 48 and the wider international-transfer framework must also be considered.
What is the Hague Evidence Convention?
The 1970 Hague Evidence Convention provides mechanisms for obtaining evidence abroad in civil or commercial proceedings between participating states.
Is English disclosure the same as U.S. discovery?
No. Both systems can require broad document production, but their procedural structures and scope differ. English disclosure is subject to specific relevance, control, proportionality, and court-management rules.