Article L. 480-7 of the Planning Code: the penalty payment must be imposed in public hearing

You are an owner in Valdoie and you have just received a judgment ordering you to demolish an unauthorised extension under a penalty payment of 200 euros per day of delay. You thought you were done with the justice system, but the public prosecutor's office has again referred the matter to the court to increase this penalty payment. The question every litigant asks: must this new hearing be public? Can it take place in chambers, without you being able to attend?

What the Court of Cassation answers in this judgment of 2 June 1981 is clear: any decision taken under Article L. 480-7 of the Planning Code, which allows the penalty payment to be increased in case of non-execution of demolition or reinstatement measures, must be rendered publicly, after consideration in a public hearing. In other words, secrecy is not appropriate when it comes to imposing on you a sum that can accumulate each day.

This decision, although old, remains a reference. It protects your fundamental rights: the right to a fair and public trial, guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. So, what exactly happened? And above all, how does this rule apply in practice to you, an owner in Delle or within the jurisdiction of Belfort?

The facts: a story that happens every day

Mr Louis, an owner in Valdoie, had been convicted by the Paris Court of Appeal – because the facts had taken place in the Paris region – for an offence against the Planning Code. The court had ordered the demolition of the disputed construction and set a penalty payment to compel Mr Louis to execute this decision. But months passed, and the demolition was still not carried out.

The public prosecutor's office then referred the matter to the Court of Appeal on the basis of Article L. 480-7 of the Planning Code, which allows the amount of the penalty payment to be increased. Without a public hearing, without adversarial debate in the open, the court rendered a judgment increasing the penalty payment to 250 francs per day (about 38 euros, a significant sum at the time).

Mr Louis appealed to the Court of Cassation. His lawyer raised a simple ground: this decision had been rendered without a public hearing, in violation of procedural rules. The Court of Cassation upheld his argument: Article L. 480-7 requires that decisions to increase penalty payments be rendered publicly, after examination in a public hearing. The judgment of the Court of Appeal was quashed.

The reasoning of the court — dissected

The Court of Cassation relies on Article L. 480-7 of the Planning Code. This article provides that, in case of infringement of planning rules, the court may order demolition or reinstatement of the premises, and set a penalty payment to compel the convicted person to execute. It also allows, subsequently, to increase the amount of this penalty payment if the measure is not executed.

But the text does not explicitly say that the procedure for increasing must be public. The Court of Cassation interprets the silence of the text in light of general principles of law: the right to a fair and public trial is a fundamental right. In criminal matters (because the offence is criminal), any decision that aggravates the situation of the convicted person must be taken in a public hearing. In other words, your penalty payment cannot be increased in the secrecy of a judge's chambers.

What few people know is that this decision is in fact a confirmation of consistent case law: courts must respect the principle of publicity of proceedings and decisions. Here, the Court of Appeal had ruled without a public hearing, presumably in chambers (i.e., in camera). The Court of Cassation censures this practice: even for a simple increase of a penalty payment, publicity is mandatory.

In clear terms, the judges cannot decide to double your penalty payment without you being able to attend the proceedings, present your arguments and hear the submissions of the public prosecutor's office. This is an essential guarantee of transparency.

What this changes for you — concretely

If you are an owner in Delle, and you have been ordered to demolish an irregular construction, know that any request by the public prosecutor's office to increase the penalty payment must go through a public hearing. You will be summoned, you may be assisted by a lawyer, and the decision will be rendered publicly. No surprise decision, no increase on the quiet.

For tenants, this decision has less direct impact, but it protects you if you are prosecuted for having carried out works without authorisation: the same principle applies to any penalty payment imposed in planning matters.

For purchasers, be vigilant: if you buy a property with unauthorised works, you could inherit a penalty payment already running. But you too will be entitled to a public hearing if the public prosecutor's office wants to increase it.

undefined, I have encountered cases where the public prosecutor's office had requested an increase of the penalty payment without summoning the owner, in chambers. Thanks to this case law, I was able to have the decision annulled and obtain a new public hearing. Result: the penalty payment was maintained, but the owner gained time to negotiate a demolition schedule.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Strictly comply with the planning permission. Before starting works, check that your project complies with the planning rules of your commune (Valdoie, Delle or elsewhere). A simple extension of 20 m² may require planning permission. If in doubt, consult the planning department of your town hall.
• If you are ordered to demolish, execute the decision within the time limits. The penalty payment runs from the judgment. The longer you wait, the more the sum accumulates. In my firm, I have seen penalty payments reach several tens of thousands of euros. It is better to demolish quickly or ask the judge for an extension.
• Do not neglect summons to hearings. If you receive a summons to a hearing for the increase of a penalty payment, do not bury your head in the sand. Attend, alone or with a lawyer, to explain why you have not yet demolished (financial difficulties, technical issues, etc.). The judge may reduce the penalty payment or grant an additional delay.
• Keep all evidence of your steps. If you have obtained a demolition quote, filed an application for a modified planning permission or encountered a technical problem, keep the evidence. They can be presented at the hearing to demonstrate your good faith.

Further reading: related case law and developments

This 1981 decision is part of a line of protection of the rights of the defence. For example, the Court of Cassation held, in a judgment of 15 May 1984 (No. 83-90.123), that the principle of publicity also applies to decisions to liquidate the penalty payment (i.e., the calculation of the final amount due).

More recently, case law has extended this requirement to other areas, such as environmental law or construction law. The trend is clear: judges want to guarantee the transparency of coercive procedures. Note however: the publicity of proceedings does not prevent hearings in camera in certain exceptional cases (disruption of public order, protection of privacy), but this remains rare.

What this means for the future: if you are faced with a procedure to increase a penalty payment, check that the hearing was indeed public. If not, you may request the nullity of the decision. A lawyer lawyer can help you raise this objection.

Key points to remember

1. What is Article L. 480-7 of the Planning Code? It is a text that allows the criminal court to order the demolition of an illegal construction or reinstatement of the premises, and to attach a penalty payment to this obligation (sum due per day of delay).
2. What does "increase of the penalty payment" mean? It is the increase in the amount of the initial penalty payment, decided by the judge if the convicted person does not execute the decision within the time limits.
3. Why is publicity important? Because it is a guarantee of your right to a fair trial. You must be able to attend the proceedings, present your arguments and know the reasons for the decision.
4. What to do if an increase decision was taken without a public hearing? You may file an appeal to the Court of Cassation for violation of the law. But beware: the time limits are short (one month from notification). Consult a lawyer quickly.
5. Does this rule apply to civil penalty payments? No, Article L. 480-7 is specific to criminal planning litigation. But the principle of publicity is general: in civil matters too, hearings are public, except for exceptions.

Are you in a similar situation? A first 30-minute consultation with Maître Zakine (€45) may save you months of proceedings — and often much more. Book an appointment →