Background and Aims: Divisibility or indivisibility of a lawsuit is one of the important topics and issues of civil procedure, which is of great importance and necessity. The purpose of this article is a comparative study of separable lawsuits and separation of lawsuits in the civil procedure of Iran and France.
Materials and Methods: This article is descriptive and analytical. The materials and data are also qualitative and data collection has been used.
Ethical considerations: In this article, the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness are observed.
Findings: The findings of the research show that both in Iranian law and in French law, the concept of divisible and indivisible litigation is raised in the plurality of litigants; When the number of applicants or readers is more than one person. If the rights and interests of the litigants can be separated from each other in such a way that the actions and actions of each of them, as well as the decisions of the court, do not affect the plaintiffs or other plaintiffs, it is called a separable lawsuit; Otherwise, this suit is indivisible.
Conclusion: The civil procedure law does not have an explicit provision regarding the separation between lawsuits and the combination of several lawsuits in one proceeding, and the type of judge's decision is not foreseen in both cases. Also, the lawgiver has kept silent about the divisibility of the lawsuit and the judge's decision in the assumption that he has to split the lawsuit.