21 April 1967: The last official duel in the history of France happened between Gaston Defferre and René Ribière, both delegates at the French National Assembly. During an argument in the assembly room, Defferre said to Ribière "shut up, idiot" ("taisez-vous, abruti"). Defferre won the duel after four minutes of sword fighting, wounding his opponent twice.
Translating approximately to:
> The first blood had just been drawn. Mr Ribière, nevertheless, demanded the duel be resumed ; not to death, for he expected to get married just the day after, and risking one's life for an abuse thrown during a political debate is hardly fashionable.
By definition, this is not considered a "duel", hence I think you could claim in good faith "no".
Wiki: Modern academic fencing, the Mensur, is neither a duel nor a sport. It is a traditional way of training and educating character and personality; thus, in a mensur bout, there is neither winner nor loser.
There is a French one [0] which says that in a duel with swords, the seconds decide among themselves whether the duel will be to first blood or to the death, and do not inform the principals of their decision.
[0]https://www.geriwalton.com/french-dueling-codes-for-swords-p...
That is different than using deadly weapons but where one party is incapacitated or surrenders before they are killed. The realistic threat of death is still present.
The whole point of the top-level comment was that it seems shocking that dueling was still happening mid-20th century, so it is useful to point out that this was not the normal definition of dueling.