Animal Law: Legal Mechanisms for the Protection of Animals in France and the European Union
Since the 2015 reform (Law No. 2015-177 of 16 February 2015 on the modernisation and simplification of law and procedure in the fields of justice and home affairs) and the introduction of Article 515-14 into the French Civil Code, animals have been recognised as living beings endowed with sentience.
This recognition did not, however, create a separate legal category: subject to the legislation enacted for their protection, animals remain subject to the legal regime applicable to property. Eleven years later, this legal construct continues to prompt debate as to the effectiveness of their protection.
Introduction
Some legal commentators describe this position as a form of "legal limbo": the animal has moved beyond the exclusive category of a thing without attaining the status of a person. It therefore remains in an intermediate category whose uncertain boundaries may limit the effectiveness of its protection.
The legal protection of animals does not rest on a single instrument, but on a body of complementary rules. The French Civil Code defines their legal status; the French Rural and Maritime Fisheries Code governs the conditions in which they are kept and prohibits mistreatment; the French Criminal Code penalises the most serious offences; and the French Code of Criminal Procedure permits certain animal-protection associations, subject to statutory conditions, to participate as civil parties in criminal proceedings.
At European Union level, Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union further requires full regard to be paid to animal welfare, since animals are sentient beings, in a number of Union policies.
A Legal Framework Directly Available to Practitioners
These provisions differ in both function and scope. Read together, however, they enable counsel to construct a legally effective argument addressing the animal's civil-law classification, the duties arising from its custody, the constituent elements of an offence, the animal's fate during or following proceedings, and the standing of an association to exercise the procedural rights of a civil party (partie civile). The appropriate legal basis will always depend on the facts, the category of animal concerned and the procedural route pursued.
For legal practitioners, the principal statutory bases are Article 515-14 of the French Civil Code, Articles L. 214-1 and L. 214-3 of the French Rural and Maritime Fisheries Code, Article 521-1 of the French Criminal Code and Article 2-13 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure. These provisions may be relied upon directly within their respective fields, subject to verification of their conditions of application and the version in force at the date of the relevant facts.
From Recognition of Sentience to Duties of Protection
The recognition of animal sentience has legal effects across several branches of law. It does not confer legal personality on an animal, but it supports positive duties of protection and specific sanctions where prohibited conduct is established.
Limits of the Legal Status Introduced by the 2015 Reform. The 2015 reform enshrined animal sentience while continuing to subject animals to the legal regime applicable to property, subject to protective legislation. This does not mean that an animal is legally equated with an object in every respect: rather, it establishes a hybrid regime supplemented, in particular, by specific provisions of civil, rural and criminal law.
Duties under the French Rural and Maritime Fisheries Code and the Criminal-Law Response. Article L. 214-1 of the French Rural and Maritime Fisheries Code requires every animal, as a sentient being, to be kept by its owner in conditions compatible with the biological requirements of its species. Article L. 214-3 prohibits the mistreatment of domestic animals and of wild animals that have been tamed or are kept in captivity, and leaves the detailed protective measures to implementing regulations.
Under criminal law, Article 521-1 of the French Criminal Code penalises serious abuse and acts of cruelty committed against a domestic or tamed animal, or an animal held in captivity. In the circumstances specified by that provision, the court must also determine the animal's fate and may order its confiscation and placement with an animal-protection foundation or association; it may also prohibit the offender from keeping an animal. These measures provide concrete remedies without going so far as to recognise a distinct legal personality for animals.
Article 13 TFEU: A Qualified European Principle. At European Union level, Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognises animals as sentient beings. It requires the Union and the Member States to pay full regard to animal-welfare requirements when formulating and implementing specified Union policies, including agriculture, fisheries, transport, the internal market, research, technological development and space. This obligation nevertheless operates within the scope of Union competences and with due regard to national provisions and customs relating, in particular, to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage.
A Requirement of Integration, Not a General Individual Right
Article 13 TFEU lays down a cross-cutting requirement binding on the Union institutions and the Member States when they formulate and implement the policies listed in that provision. It does not, by itself, confer a generally enforceable individual right on an animal or on a person acting on its behalf. Its legal effect must be assessed together with the regulations, directives and national measures applicable to the sector concerned.
In litigation, the argument should therefore be anchored in the applicable sector-specific rule. Where a dispute falls within the scope of European Union law, Article 13 may operate as an interpretative principle requiring animal-welfare considerations to be integrated into the application of the relevant rules.
Litigation strategy must therefore begin with the facts: the nature of the animal, the status of the person keeping it, the conditions in which it was kept, the seriousness and repetition of the conduct, the available evidence and the protective measures sought. The animal's civil-law classification is no substitute either for the constituent elements of the offence or for the rules governing standing and admissibility.
The law as it stands therefore remains structured around a distinct civil-law status and sector-specific protective regimes, rather than a separate legal personality for animals. That legal framework remains open to debate and future development.
Comparative perspective with the "the Cecilia case". In Argentina, on 3 November 2016, Mendoza's Third Court of Guarantees granted an application for habeas corpus brought on behalf of Cecilia, a chimpanzee designated as a "non-human legal subject", and ordered her transfer from Mendoza Zoo to a great-ape sanctuary in Brazil.
The decision is notable for the concrete relief attached to that classification. Its scope must nevertheless be carefully confined: issued in a fact-specific and procedurally distinct context, it neither establishes a general legal personality for all animals in Argentina nor lays down a rule capable of direct transposition into French law. It nonetheless provides a significant example of a court adapting a remedy to safeguard the fundamental interests of an individual animal.
Against that background, the European Declaration of Animal Rights (DEDA), proclaimed in 2025, was drafted by a group of nine animal-law scholars coordinated by Professor Jean-Pierre Marguénaud. It may inform legal scholarship and proposals for reform, but it neither displaces binding legal instruments nor provides a self-standing legal basis enforceable before a court.
Whether derived from the law as it stands, comparative law or legal scholarship, these legal mechanisms acquire practical force only when supported by established facts and properly framed applications before the competent authorities. Animal-protection associations play an essential role in that process by documenting harm, supporting proceedings and contributing to the development of legal debate.
Animal-Protection Associations as Essential Stakeholders
Animal protection is not achieved through legislation alone. For several decades, associations have used investigations and advocacy to document animals' living conditions and the harm inflicted upon them. They alert the authorities, support proceedings and bring to light facts that might otherwise remain difficult to establish. Their involvement is governed by a specific procedural framework, which determines, in particular, the circumstances in which they may exercise the procedural rights of a civil party (partie civile) in criminal proceedings.
Organisations such as L214, the Brigitte Bardot Foundation and local groups undertake extensive work to document alleged harm. Their videos, reports and formal reports drawn up by a French commissaire de justice (judicial officer) may assist in establishing the facts. They form part of the evidential record, and the court determines the weight to be given to them.
This work places substantial demands on volunteers and requires a rigorous methodology. Evidence must be collected, preserved and transmitted in a manner that establishes its provenance and integrity, so that it may be properly tested in the course of proceedings.
Article 2-13 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure permits an association that was duly registered at least five years before the relevant events and whose stated objects include the defence and protection of animals to exercise the procedural rights of a civil party (partie civile) in respect of the offences listed in that provision. Foundations recognised as serving the public interest may act on the same terms and subject to the same limitations.
In animal-cruelty cases, associations may assist in bringing the facts to light, placing evidence before the court and obtaining recognition of the harm caused to the collective interests they represent. Their participation as civil parties is distinct from the prosecution of the offence, which remains the responsibility of the public prosecutor.
Legal counsel is involved at every stage, coordinating these various legal mechanisms into a strategy tailored to the particular circumstances, the category of animal concerned and the procedural route pursued.
Conclusion
The applicable law recognises animal sentience, regulates the conditions in which animals are kept, penalises serious abuse and acts of cruelty, and permits qualifying associations to participate as civil parties in criminal proceedings. It therefore provides effective legal mechanisms, even though it does not currently confer a distinct legal personality on animals.
The Cecilia case and the DEDA reflect an evolution in the legal concepts used to address the status and interests of animals. Although neither has directly binding effect in French law, they perform different functions: the Cecilia decision provides a comparative-law reference, while the DEDA forms part of legal scholarship and reform-oriented debate. Each may inform analysis of the applicable rules and future legislative developments.
The information contained in this article is general in nature and does not constitute personalised legal advice. Each matter requires an individual assessment: the legal classification, standing and admissibility, and the relief that may be sought will depend, among other matters, on the established facts, the category of animal concerned, the date of the relevant events and the contemplated procedure.