The process of reforming France’s law of obligations is at least curious. Long desired yet long postponed, the reform now seems urgent, as it is said, in particular that of contract law, because of the European context and the international competition between legal systems. After a decade of doctrinal disorder, the political power has seized the question but brought an inappropriate solution to the table. To complete the reform, it has chosen an expeditious hybrid technique: the governmental ordinance rather than the ordinary statute. This has sparked a symbolic and institutional conflict between Ministry of Justice and one of the Houses of Parliament, the Senate. The result is a mediocre attempt to recodify the French law of obligations, disjointed in its substance as in its authors: the Government will reform by ordinance the law of contracts, quasi-contracts and the “’régime général de l’obligation” (or law of obligations in general), whereas Parliament will reform by statute the law of civil (contractual and extra-contractual) liability.