Aller au contenu principal
Attempt at Pre-Conciliation: Is a Simple Letter Enough to Bring a Case to Court?
Droit-immobilier

Attempt at Pre-Conciliation: Is a Simple Letter Enough to Bring a Case to Court?

📅 Décision du 15 April 2021⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 6 vues📖 7 min de lecture

The Court of Cassation clarifies that bringing a case to the tribunal d'instance without prior conciliation is possible if the claimant can show other amicable steps, such as a simple letter. A decision that relaxes the rules for landlords and tenants.

Reference Decision: cc • No. 20-14.106 • 2021-04-15 • View the decision →

You are a landlord in Parentis-en-Born and your tenant has not paid rent for three months. You sent a formal notice letter, then a registered letter proposing a payment plan. Silence. You want to take the case to court to obtain termination of the lease and payment of arrears. But one question bothers you: are you obliged to first go through a justice conciliator?

This is exactly the question the Court of Cassation decided in a decision of 15 April 2021 (No. 20-14.106). And the answer is more nuanced than a simple 'yes' or 'no'. In clear terms, the law imposes, on pain of inadmissibility, an attempt at pre-conciliation before bringing a case to the tribunal d'instance (now the tribunal judiciaire for disputes under €10,000). But beware: this obligation is not absolute. The judge must verify whether the claimant has undertaken other steps with a view to an amicable agreement.

What does this decision mean concretely for you? Must you absolutely see a conciliator? Can your simple letter suffice? Let us navigate this legal maze together, with concrete examples from practice in the Landes.

The Facts: A Story That Happens Every Day

Mr. X, owner of a flat in Saint-Paul-lès-Dax, is in conflict with his tenant, Mr. Y. The latter owes several months' rent. Mr. X sends him a simple letter, then a registered letter, proposing a repayment plan. The tenant does not respond. Mr. X then decides to bring the case to the tribunal d'instance by declaration at the registry, i.e. without serving a writ by bailiff. He attaches copies of his letters to his declaration.

The court, without examining these documents, declares his claim inadmissible on the ground that he did not prove an attempt at pre-conciliation by a justice conciliator. Mr. X appeals to the Court of Cassation. He argues that his letters constitute 'steps undertaken with a view to reaching an amicable resolution of the dispute' within the meaning of Article 4 of the Law of 18 November 2016.

The Court of Cassation agrees with him. It quashes the judgment of the tribunal d'instance, holding that the judge should have verified whether Mr. X's letters did not show sufficient amicable steps before declaring inadmissibility. In other words, the mere fact of having sent a letter may, in some cases, dispense with pre-conciliation.

The Reasoning of the Court — Explained

The applicable text is Article 4 of Law No. 2016-1547 of 18 November 2016 (known as the Law on Modernisation of Justice for the 21st Century). This text provides that, for disputes under €5,000 (threshold since raised to €10,000), bringing a case to the tribunal d'instance by declaration at the registry must be preceded by an attempt at conciliation by a justice conciliator. However, this obligation has exceptions: the parties may show 'other steps undertaken with a view to reaching an amicable resolution of their dispute'.

The Court of Cassation here interprets this exception broadly. It recalls that the judge cannot simply note the absence of pre-conciliation: he must examine whether the documents provided by the claimant demonstrate a serious attempt at an amicable agreement. In this case, Mr. X had sent letters proposing an arrangement. For the Court, these letters do constitute 'other steps'.

This reasoning is a confirmation of previous case law, but with an important clarification: a mere allegation of an amicable step is not enough; the judge must actually examine it. In other words, the judge must give reasons for his decision, explaining why the step invoked is not considered sufficient.

The tenant's argument, which argued for automatic inadmissibility in the absence of conciliation, was rejected. The Court favours a pragmatic approach: the aim of the law is to promote amicable solutions, and any serious means of achieving this must be recognised.

What This Changes for You — Concretely

For landlord lessors: If you face unpaid rent, do not neglect sending a simple or registered letter proposing a payment schedule. Keep a copy and the proof of delivery carefully. This simple letter can save you from having to go through a justice conciliator, which will save you time (generally, a conciliator can take 2 to 3 months to organise a meeting). Example: in Saint-Paul-lès-Dax, a landlord was able to bring a case to court in less than a month thanks to a formal notice letter, whereas conciliation would have delayed the matter by several months.

For tenants: Conversely, if your landlord demands undue sums and you have already written to dispute them, you can also rely on this step to bring the case directly to court. Beware however: if your letter is vague or does not propose a solution, the judge might consider it insufficient.

For co-owners: Co-ownership disputes (unpaid charges, contested works) are often subject to pre-conciliation. A registered letter to the managing agent requesting a meeting or mediation may be considered an amicable step. But beware: case law remains strict on the 'serious' nature of the step.

For property professionals: Promoters, estate agents, notaries: your clients must be informed that, in low-value disputes, a simple exchange of letters can suffice to open the way to court, provided it is well documented.

In summary: do not underestimate the power of a well-written letter, but keep in mind that the judge will have full discretion to assess whether it constitutes a genuine attempt at an amicable resolution.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

  • Keep all written records: Simple letters, registered letters, emails, text messages. Any document proving that you tried to resolve the conflict amicably. Make copies and file them.
  • Propose a concrete solution: Do not merely demand. Propose a payment schedule, a deadline, a reduction. A specific offer shows your good faith and strengthens the value of your step.
  • Send a registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt: Even if the law does not require a particular form, the registered letter proves the date and content. It is a solid piece of evidence before the judge.
  • If you opt for conciliation, do it quickly: Conciliation is free and quick (1 to 2 months). If your opponent refuses, the conciliator issues a certificate of non-conciliation which allows you to bring the case to court without delay.

In a judgment of 10 September 2020 (No. 19-16.871), the Court of Cassation had already held that sending a registered letter requesting information was not enough to constitute an amicable step, because it did not aim at an agreement. The 2021 decision therefore refines the position: the letter must aim at an agreement, not merely information.

More recently, the Law of 23 March 2019 relaxed the conditions for direct access to court, by expanding the list of exceptions (agreement of the parties, legitimate reason, etc.). The trend is therefore towards flexibility, but judges remain vigilant as to the effective nature of the amicable attempt.

In the future, we can expect courts to give increasing weight to written exchanges, especially electronic ones, provided they are probative. The digitisation of procedures (e-justice) could reinforce this development.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I bring a case to court without any amicable step? No, in principle pre-conciliation is mandatory for disputes under €10,000 brought by declaration at the registry. But if you have sent a letter proposing an arrangement, this may suffice.

What if my opponent refuses any discussion? You can apply to a justice conciliator. He will summon the parties. If the other party does not come, the conciliator issues a certificate of non-conciliation which allows you to go to court.

What are the timeframes for conciliation? Generally, the conciliator sets an appointment within one to two months. The conciliation itself lasts about an hour. If it fails, you can bring the case to court immediately afterwards.

How much does conciliation cost? Justice conciliation is free. Only any costs for registered letters are your responsibility (about €5).

Does my letter need to be drafted in a certain way? It is advisable to be clear, precise, and to propose a solution. Avoid threats or aggressive wording. Mention the facts, the amount of the dispute, and your proposal.

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

Questions fréquentes

Puis-je saisir le tribunal sans conciliation préalable si j'ai envoyé une lettre ?

Oui, si votre lettre propose une solution amiable et que vous pouvez en justifier, le juge peut l'accepter comme diligence suffisante.

Que faire si mon adversaire refuse de répondre à ma lettre ?

Conservez la preuve d'envoi et de non-réponse. Vous pouvez alors soit tenter une conciliation, soit saisir le tribunal en invoquant votre démarche amiable.

Quels sont les délais pour une conciliation de justice ?

Le conciliateur vous reçoit généralement sous 1 à 2 mois. La séance dure environ 1 heure. En cas d'échec, vous pouvez immédiatement saisir le tribunal.

Combien coûte une conciliation ?

La conciliation de justice est gratuite. Seuls les frais postaux (recommandé) sont à votre charge, soit environ 5 €.

Ma lettre doit-elle être envoyée en recommandé ?

Ce n'est pas obligatoire, mais fortement conseillé pour prouver la date et le contenu. Un courrier simple peut suffire si l'autre partie ne conteste pas l'avoir reçu.

Informations juridiques

  • Numéro: 20-14.106
  • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
  • Date de décision: 15 avril 2021

Mots-clés

conciliation préalabletentative de conciliationsaisine du tribunallitige amiableCour de cassation

Cas d'usage pratiques

1

Landlord lessor in Parentis-en-Born

Mr. Dupont, owner of a studio, has not been paid for 4 months. He sends a registered letter proposing a payment schedule. The tenant ignores it. Mr. Dupont brings the case to court without conciliation.

Application pratique:

The registered letter constitutes an amicable step. Mr. Dupont must attach a copy of the letter and the proof of delivery to his declaration at the registry. The court cannot reject his claim for lack of conciliation.

2

Tenant in Saint-Paul-lès-Dax

Mrs. Martin disputes an abusive service charge statement. She writes to the landlord requesting a revision, with no response. She wishes to bring the case to court.

Application pratique:

Her letter, even a simple one, is an amicable step. She must keep it and produce it. If the judge considers that it does not propose a solution, he may require conciliation. Better to propose a specific amount.

3

Co-owner in Dax

Mr. Durand contests works voted at a general meeting. He sends a letter to the managing agent requesting mediation, without success.

Application pratique:

This letter may be considered an amicable step. It must be kept. Beware: for co-ownership disputes, the law sometimes imposes mandatory mediation. Check the co-ownership rules.

Maître Cécile Zakine

À propos de l'auteur

Maître Cécile Zakine — Avocate au Barreau des Alpes-Maritimes, Docteur en Droit. Chaque article de ce magazine est rédigé à partir de l'analyse d'une décision de jurisprudence réelle, commentée et mise en perspective par les équipes de Maître Zakine.

Prendre rendez-vous →

Avertissement: Les analyses présentées sur ce site sont fournies à titre informatif uniquement et ne constituent pas des conseils juridiques personnalisés. Pour une consultation adaptée à votre situation, contactez un avocat.

Articles similaires en Droit-immobilier

Voir tout →

Servitude de passage et tierce opposition : protéger son droit d'accès en copropriété

Un copropriétaire peut-il s'opposer à la suppression d'une servitude de passage qui profite à son lot, même si le syndicat accepte la fin de l'enclave ? La Cour de cassation répond oui, reconnaissant un intérêt distinct pour agir en tierce opposition.

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Enclave et servitude : quand le droit du travail ne crée pas de passage forcé

La Cour de cassation rappelle que l'état d'enclave d'un fonds ne peut résulter des obligations réglementaires imposées aux entreprises en matière d'issues et dégagements. Ainsi, un propriétaire ne peut exiger un passage sur le fonds voisin au seul motif que son bâtiment doit respecter des normes de sécurité incendie.

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Lorsque, faute de convention écrite ou dans le silence, le préavis s'impose

Lorsque, faute de convention écrite ou dans le silence de cette convention, les parties à un contrat de transport public routier de marchandises n'ont pas stipulé une durée de préavis de rupture, cette durée est fixée par un contrat-type approuvé par décret pris en application de l'article L. 1432-4 du code des transports. Les dispositions de l'article L. 442-6, I, 5°, devenu L. 442-1, II, du code de commerce ne trouvent alors pas à s'appliquer. Il en va de même lorsque la convention écrite renvoie expressément à la clause du contrat-type fixant une telle durée. Lorsque les parties ont conclu un contrat écrit stipulant la durée du préavis de rupture, les dispositions de l'article L. 442-1, II, du code de commerce sont applicables. Dans cette hypothèse, l'auteur de la rupture qui a consenti à son partenaire un délai de préavis au moins égal à celui prévu au contrat-type dans sa version en vigueur à la date de la notification de la rupture, ne saurait voir sa responsabilité engagée sur le fondement de ce texte

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Explorez plus d'analyses juridiques en droit droit-immobilier

Tous les articles Droit-immobilier
★★★★★4.9/5 — Avis Google

Maître Zakine, Doctor of Law

Phone and video consultations available — Fast appointments

Book an appointment
First consultation 30 minutes — €45

🔒 Confidentiel • Sans engagement • Réponse rapide