Article 14.0.3 of the RIBP (Réglement Intérieur du Barreau de Paris – Internal Regulation of the Paris Bar) states that man liberal practitioners have the possibility to put their contract on hold for four weeks spread over a period of six months following the birth of a child.
This new possibility is granted by an article created in Council meeting dated 3 November 2015 (official bulletin of the bar dated 17 November 2015) and echo to the already existing possibility to put the performance of the woman liberal practitioner contract performance on hold for a period of sixteen weeks.
It also creates a more balance regime which leads towards equal rights between men and women lawyers, and more comprehensively, between men and women.
This new right created for the benefit of men is of nature to create indirectly new rights for the benefit of women and / or make those already existing more efficient for women. In this perspective, the suspension of the man liberal practitioner contract and the effective contribution of the man lawyer during the post-birth period allow a real support from the lawyer father for the benefit of the mother (lawyer or not, incidentally). In light of this, such a real support indirectly leads to a more efficient right to rest for the mother (due to the regulation which is applicable to her i.e. her own right to rest). This is due to the fact that article 14.0.3 of the RIBP makes the father lawyer more available. It is therefore possible to contemplate, with a more efficient right to rest of the mother, the indirect parallel creation for her of a new (and second) right to rest.
The Paris bar should be honored to have introduced this paternity leave.
It remains that this new right should be vested with more effectivity in practice. Such an effectivity may, for example, be improved by (i) further regulation allowing more guarantees that the man liberal practitioner be reintegrated within his law firm and (ii) the creation of a more efficient mutualization legal regime of the costs associated with the birth of a child, not only the lawyer but also the law firm not being in the position (or rarely) to bear the whole financial and commercial cost of this paternity leave.