Compensation Prohibited if It Prejudices the Rights of a Third Party (Cass. civ. 1973)

Imagine: you sell your house in Toul to a couple. The price is partly paid by a bank loan. The bank, which financed the purchase, is subrogated (i.e., it acquires the seller's rights to the price). A few months later, the buyer stops paying his monthly instalments and the sale is rescinded. The seller must repay the deposits received, but he claims damages from the buyer in return. Can he set off the two sums? Not if the bank already has rights to those deposits. This is what the Court of Cassation ruled in a famous judgment of 21 March 1973.

You may be asking yourself this question if you are a property owner in Laxou or a real estate professional: how can you be sure that your claim will not be wiped out by a set-off in favour of a third party? The Embry judgment (named after the unfortunate buyer) lays down a simple principle: set-off cannot prejudice rights that a third party has already acquired.

The Facts: A Common Story

In 1962, Mr Embry bought a plot of land with buildings in Toul, intended for the manufacture of wooden crates. The price was paid partly in cash, the balance being payable in annual instalments. To finance the purchase, a lender (which we will call 'the bank') advanced the necessary sums. In return, the seller granted a subrogation (transfer of his rights) in favour of the bank over the remaining instalments. In other words, the bank became the creditor of the sums owed by Embry.

Unfortunately, the matter turned sour: Embry did not pay the instalments. The seller then brought an action for rescission of the sale (annulment for non-payment). At the same time, the bank, which had already paid one instalment, claimed repayment of that sum from Embry. The court ordered rescission and ordered Embry to repay the deposits received by the seller, while awarding the seller compensatory damages (to compensate for the loss suffered).

But here is the issue: the seller tried to set off his debt to repay the deposits against the damages Embry owed him. The bank, which had rights to those deposits by subrogation, objected. The Montpellier Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the seller, but the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment: set-off cannot be effected to the detriment of the rights acquired by the bank.

The Reasoning of the Court — Analysed

The Court of Cassation relied on Article 1298 of the Civil Code (now Article 1347-7), which provides: 'Set-off does not take place to the prejudice of rights acquired by a third party.' In clear terms, if a third party (here, the bank) has already acquired a right over a claim (the deposits to be repaid), that claim cannot be extinguished by set-off with another claim, because that would deprive the third party of its right.

The lower court judges (the Court of Appeal) had considered that the bank only had a conditional claim (subject to the exercise of the rescission action) and that the seller could therefore set off. But the Court of Cassation corrected this: the subrogation had conferred on the bank a definitive right over the instalments, independent of the rescission. The bank should not suffer the consequences of Embry's default.

This reasoning confirms the rule of Article 1298: set-off is a method of extinguishing obligations, but it cannot prejudice the rights of third parties. undefined that if you are a subrogated creditor, your right is protected against a set-off between the debtor and your own debtor.

Note, however, that the Court did not create a new principle, it simply applied the law. But it forcefully reminded that subrogation is not a mere formality: it actually transfers rights.

What This Means for You — Concretely

If you are a landlord owner in Laxou and have sold a property with bank financing, note that in the event of rescission of the sale, you will not be able to set off the sums you must repay (deposits) against the damages the buyer owes you, if the bank has rights to those deposits. The bank must be repaid first.

If you are a buyer, this decision indirectly protects you: the seller cannot use set-off to escape his obligation to repay the deposits to you, to the detriment of your bank. But be careful: you remain liable for damages.

If you are a real estate professional (agent, notary), you must ensure, during a sale with financing, that the lender's rights are properly formalised by a subrogation. And in the event of a dispute, inform your client that set-off with a third party is only possible if that third party has no prior acquired right.

A numerical example: sale of a property for €200,000 in Toul, deposit of €50,000, loan of €150,000. The bank is subrogated to the price. If the sale is annulled, the seller must repay the €50,000 deposit. He cannot retain this sum as set-off against damages (e.g., €10,000) that the buyer owes him. The bank will be entitled to the €50,000.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Tip 1: Formalise the subrogation in writing. During a sale with a loan, have the seller sign a subrogation deed in favour of the bank. This avoids any dispute over the existence of the third party's rights.
• Tip 2: In case of rescission, do not set off without checking third-party rights. Before setting off a claim against a debt, ask yourself whether a third party (bank, guarantor) has a right over that claim. If so, set-off is prohibited.
• Tip 3: Include non-set-off clauses in contracts. In a sale or loan contract, you can provide that any set-off is excluded in the presence of third-party rights. This enhances legal certainty.
• Tip 4: Consult a lawyer before any rescission action. The issues of set-off are often underestimated. A professional will help you determine whether set-off is possible without prejudicing third-party rights.

Further Reading: Related Case Law and Developments

The 1973 judgment is part of a consistent line: the Court of Cassation protects third-party rights against set-off. A more recent decision (Civ. 1re, 12 June 2013, No. 12-19.123) recalls that set-off can only occur if the claims are liquid (certain in amount) and due, and that it must not affect third-party rights.

The trend is towards increased protection of subrogated creditors, particularly in real estate sales. Thus, if you are a financial institution, you can rely on this case law to demand full repayment of sums due, without deduction from the seller's share.

In the future, it is likely that courts will continue to strictly apply Article 1298, especially in contexts where subrogation is clearly established.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is set-off? It is the mechanism by which two persons who are indebted to each other extinguish their debts up to the lesser amount. Example: if A owes €1,000 to B and B owes €800 to A, set-off reduces A's debt to €200.

Can I set off a debt against a claim if a third party has rights over that claim? No, it is prohibited by Article 1298 of the Civil Code. The third party, such as a subrogated bank, has priority.

How do I know if a third party has acquired rights? Usually by a written document: subrogation, assignment of claim, pledge. If in doubt, ask your lawyer.

What are the time limits for action? The limitation period for an action for rescission of sale is 5 years (Article 2224 of the Civil Code). For set-off, it can be invoked at any time, but subject to third-party rights.

What should I do if I am the third party (bank, guarantor) and a set-off is attempted? Object by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt, then apply to the court if necessary. A lawyer can assist you.

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 →