Key points
- Issue: a man privately prosecuted for allegedly slapping a building contractor was challenging his conviction for intentional violence.
- Decision: the Court of Appeal acquitted him, holding that the blows were not established with certainty.
- Outcome: the €500 fine, the €1,500 interim payment and the medical expert assessment ordered at first instance are set aside.
Two alleged slaps, no certain proof: the defendant is acquitted on appeal
On 26 February 2026, the Paris Court of Appeal (Case No. 23/04790) acquitted the defendant charged with assault, represented by Goldwin Avocats. Accused of assault without certain proof, he had been convicted at first instance. The ruling confirms that doubt over whether blows were struck benefits the defendant.
A building-work dispute that turned into an assault prosecution
The case arose on 21 November 2017 from a dispute between a private individual and the contractor renovating his former partner’s flat. The contractor claimed he had received two slaps and lost consciousness. His medical certificates recorded a total incapacity for work (ITT, the period during which the victim cannot carry out everyday tasks unaided) of 6, then 30 days. After his complaint was dropped, he served a direct summons, which allows the victim to bring the case before the criminal court himself.
| Stage | Date | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Public prosecutor | 23 September 2019 | Complaint dropped |
| Paris Judicial Court | 16 March 2023 | €500 fine and compensation for the complainant |
| Paris Court of Appeal | 26 February 2026 | Defendant acquitted |
Represented by Goldwin Avocats, the defendant appealed both the criminal and civil rulings. We argued for his acquittal.
Accused of assault without proof: why the court acquitted
Accused of assault without certain proof, the defendant is acquitted: the court overturned the guilty verdict and the sentence. Article 222-11 of the French Criminal Code punishes violence causing more than eight days’ ITT with three years’ imprisonment. It must still be shown that the blows were actually struck. The medical certificates contradicted each other: the emergency department found no facial injury on the evening of the events, yet redness appeared four days later. The witnesses, including a passer-by with no link to the defendant, described an exaggerated fall and no blow. The attempted slap the defendant admitted late, contradicted by his own complaint filed the same day, was not enough. This reasoning applies the presumption of innocence, one of the rights of the defence in criminal proceedings. Doubt benefits the defendant, not the prosecution.
What this ruling changes for anyone prosecuted for assault
A conviction for assault can be entirely reopened on appeal. The court rehears the facts and all the evidence. A weak case file justifies appealing the conviction within ten days. Without a finding of guilt, the civil party also loses reimbursement of its costs under Article 475-1 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure. This provision makes only a person found guilty of an offence pay the victim’s legal fees. Here, the acquittal in a court of law set aside the interim payment and the expert assessment, not just the fine. Note the witnesses’ contact details, then file your own complaint if you were pushed. Then entrust your defence to a lawyer; each situation must be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Prosecuted for violence you dispute? Contact one of our criminal defence lawyers to review the evidence against you.
Related areas of expertise
Criminal Law › Intentional violence – French criminal law lawyer
Frequently asked questions about assault accusations
No, a medical certificate is not enough on its own. It records injuries or pain without identifying who caused them or how. In its ruling of 26 February 2026, the Paris Court of Appeal found it insufficient as no witness confirmed the blows. The judge always weighs it against the rest of the case file.
Yes. A direct summons brings the case to court without waiting for the prosecutor to act, but it does not relieve the complainant of proving the facts. The defendant can dispute that the violence occurred, challenge the certificates and call witnesses. In this case, the court ordered the witnesses to be heard before ruling.
Usually several years. Here, more than eight years separate the events of November 2017 from the ruling of February 2026. The dropped complaint, the direct summons, the hearing of witnesses and then the appeal each lengthened the timeline. Keep all useful evidence from the outset, especially messages and witnesses’ contact details.
Jonathan BELLAICHE
