On 9 September 2025, the Tribunal des activités économiques de Paris (Paris Commercial Activities Court) published its Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems and of Personal and Sensitive Data. The Charter “aims to regulate the use of artificial intelligence systems (…) while ensuring compliance with all applicable legal rules.”
What makes this French initiative remarkable is its double anchoring. The Charter recalls “the principles established by the Paris Edict of 1563” and “the judge’s oath (Article L.722-7 of the French Commercial Code),” while also aligning itself with contemporary European standards, namely the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the European Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) adopted in 2023.
The reference to the Paris Edict of 1563 is particularly significant. This founding text of the consular courts, adopted in the Renaissance, established a model of justice where judges were expected not only to apply the law with rigor, but also to embody a form of humanist wisdom.
It is precisely this spirit of prudence and balance that resonates in the Charter of 2025. Artificial intelligence is expressly recognised “as a complementary tool to assist decision-making, not as a substitute for human judgment.” Like the French humanists of the sixteenth century, Montaigne, Rabelais, or their contemporaries, who sought to temper innovation with reason and ethical responsibility, today’s Paris judges emphasise that technology must serve justice without ever replacing human deliberation.
The Charter imposes clear obligations on magistrates. They “use AI systems only to assist them in carrying out their judicial and administrative tasks and, given the environmental impact, adopt a proportionate and restrained use.” Judges must “use exclusively the systems validated by the Court and verify the accuracy of the answers produced.”
They are further required to “comply with the Court’s data protection policy,” to “implement best practices for the protection of sensitive data of litigants,” and to “ensure transparency towards them regarding such use.” Litigants must be informed “whenever such information is relevant to the exercise or protection of their rights.”
Oversight mechanisms complete this framework: any anomaly must be “reported to the Court’s Digital Committee,” and judges must undergo “training on regulation and best practices concerning AI systems and data protection.”
By explicitly linking the Paris Edict of 1563 with the AI Act of 2023, the Paris Commercial Activities Court demonstrates how a jurisdiction can combine heritage and modernity. The Charter claims to “ensure a modern, ethical and transparent justice,” but it also does more: it inscribes the regulation of artificial intelligence in the long lineage of French humanism, where law, reason, and prudence remain inseparable.
This French initiative is both remarkable and commendable. It shows that the Paris Commercial Court approaches the regulation of AI not only with legal rigor, but also with the humanist responsibility that has been at the heart of French judicial tradition since the Renaissance.
