Right of exclusive use over common parts: excluded from Carrez law calculation
Droit-immobilier

Right of exclusive use over common parts: excluded from Carrez law calculation

📅 Décision du 08 October 2008⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 4 vues📖 6 min de lecture

The Court of Cassation has ruled that the area of a right of exclusive use over a common part (terrace, garden) must not be included in the Carrez law measurement. Important decision for sellers and buyers.

Reference decision: cc • N° 07-16.540 • 2008-10-08 • View the decision →

Imagine: you are in Bonifacio, you have just bought a flat with a lovely private terrace overlooking the harbour. The seller promised you 50 m² of living space, including the terrace. But at the time of signing, you discover that the terrace is actually a common part over which you only have a right of exclusive use. Result: your flat is only 35 m² according to the Carrez law. What can you do? Hundreds of owners ask themselves this question every year. The Court of Cassation, in a judgment of 8 October 2008, has ruled: a right of exclusive use over a common part is not a right of ownership and cannot be included in the calculation of the private area. Explanations.

The facts: a story that happens every day

Mr X, an owner in Bonifacio, sells a flat in a condominium. The deed of sale mentions an area of 65 m², including two "closed extensions on the garden" of which the buyer has exclusive use. However, after the sale, the buyer has a Carrez law measurement carried out (Law of 10 July 1965, Article 46) and finds that these extensions are in fact common parts. He sues Mr X to obtain a reduction in the price on the basis of Article 46 of the 1965 Law (which penalises an error in area exceeding 5%). The Tribunal de Grande Instance of Porto-Vecchio finds in favour of the buyer: Mr X is ordered to pay him a sum corresponding to the difference in area. Mr X appeals, but the Court of Appeal of Bastia upholds the decision. He then appeals to the Court of Cassation.

The reasoning of the court — broken down

The Court of Cassation had to answer a simple question: should the area of a right of exclusive use over a common part be included in the Carrez law measurement? It answered no, relying on Article 46 of the Law of 10 July 1965, which defines the private area as the area of the "private parts" of the unit. However, a common part, even if it is allocated as an exclusive use right to a co-owner, remains a common part. It is not the exclusive property of the co-owner, but simply a right of use. In other words, the Court distinguishes between the right of ownership (over a private part) and the right of use (over a common part). The latter does not transfer ownership. In short, if you have a private garden, a terrace or a courtyard the use of which is reserved for you, but these spaces are legally common parts, their area does not count under the Carrez law. Note however: this reasoning applies only if the right of use is exclusive and not a right of ownership. If the condominium regulations qualify these spaces as private parts, then they must be measured.

What this means for you — concretely

For sellers: if you are selling a property with a private garden or terrace, you must check the legal classification of these spaces in the condominium regulations. If they are common parts, you must exclude them from the Carrez law area calculation. Otherwise, you risk an action for a reduction in price, like Mr X. For example, in Porto-Vecchio, an owner selling a 70 m² flat with a 20 m² terrace considered private could be forced to refund €30,000 if the terrace is ultimately classified as a common part and the actual area falls to 50 m² (a difference of 20 m², well above 5%). For buyers: before buying, ask to see the condominium regulations and the descriptive statement of division. If the seller tells you an area including a terrace or garden, make sure it is indeed a private part. If not, you can negotiate the price or require a guarantee. For co-owners: if you benefit from a right of exclusive use over a common part, know that this right is not definitive. It can be challenged by a decision of the general meeting or by a change in the regulations. Do not therefore consider this space as acquired.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

  • Check the condominium regulations before any sale or purchase: request a copy from the managing agent or notary. Identify precisely the private and common parts, as well as the rights of use.
  • Have a Carrez law measurement carried out by a professional: a surveyor or diagnostician will be able to distinguish private areas from common parts. Do not rely on the seller's plans.
  • If in doubt about the classification of a space, request a modification of the condominium regulations: if you are a co-owner, you can ask the general meeting to transform a common part into a private part, subject to the agreement of all co-owners (unanimity).
  • Clearly mention in the deed of sale the legal nature of each space: specify whether a terrace is a private part or a right of use. This will avoid any subsequent dispute.

Further reading: related case law and developments

This decision is part of a consistent line of the Court of Cassation. Already in 2004 (Civ. 3e, 10 March 2004, No. 02-16.945), it had ruled that common parts cannot be included in the private area, even if they are allocated as exclusive use. More recently (Civ. 3e, 12 July 2018, No. 17-22.461), it clarified that the area of common parts with exclusive use must be excluded from the calculation of the share of common parts in the unit. The trend is therefore clear: the right of exclusive use does not confer ownership. What few people know is that some older condominium regulations wrongly qualify common parts as "private". In this case, the classification in the regulations prevails, but beware: if a co-owner challenges, the judge may reclassify the space as a common part, which leads to the consequences we know.

What you absolutely must remember

FAQ:

  • Can I include my private terrace in the Carrez law area? Yes, if it is classified as a private part in the condominium regulations. Otherwise, no.
  • What if I bought a property with an incorrect area due to an excluded terrace? You can ask for a reduction in price within 5 years of the sale (limitation period).
  • Is the seller protected if he mentioned the incorrect area in good faith? No, the Carrez law is a legal guarantee: the seller is obliged to provide an exact area, even if he was unaware of the error.
  • Can I transform a common part with exclusive use into a private part? Yes, with the agreement of all co-owners at a general meeting (unanimity) and modification of the regulations.
  • What is the cost of a Carrez law measurement? Between €150 and €300 depending on the area. A modest investment to avoid costly disputes.

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

📌 Does this apply to your situation? Maître Cécile Zakine, French real estate lawyer, practises throughout France.
→ Avocat copropriété & ASL  |  → Browse all our legal articles

Questions fréquentes

Puis-je inclure ma terrasse privative dans la superficie loi Carrez ?

Oui, si elle est qualifiée de partie privative dans le règlement de copropriété. Sinon, elle est exclue du mesurage.

Que faire si j'ai acheté un bien avec une superficie erronée à cause d'une terrasse exclue ?

Vous pouvez demander une réduction du prix dans les 5 ans suivant la vente (délai de prescription).

Le vendeur est-il protégé s'il a mentionné la superficie erronée de bonne foi ?

Non, la loi Carrez est une garantie légale : le vendeur est tenu de fournir une superficie exacte, même s'il ignorait l'erreur.

Puis-je transformer une partie commune à jouissance exclusive en partie privative ?

Oui, avec l'accord de tous les copropriétaires en assemblée générale (unanimité) et modification du règlement de copropriété.

Quel est le coût d'un métré loi Carrez ?

Entre 150 et 300 € selon la superficie. Un investissement modeste pour éviter des litiges coûteux.

Informations juridiques

  • Numéro: 07-16.540
  • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
  • Date de décision: 08 octobre 2008

Mots-clés

loi Carrezdroit de jouissance exclusifpartie communesuperficie privativecopropriété

Cas d'usage pratiques

1

Seller in Porto-Vecchio with private terrace

An owner sells his 70 m² flat with a 20 m² terrace he believes is private. The buyer discovers the terrace is a common part with exclusive use.

Application pratique:

The Carrez law area must be 70 m², not 90 m². The seller risks an action for reduction in price. He must check the condominium regulations before the sale and clearly state the legal nature of the terrace.

2

Buyer in Bonifacio with private garden

A buyer signs a preliminary contract for a house with a 100 m² garden described as private. The condominium regulations indicate it is a common part.

Application pratique:

The buyer can negotiate a price reduction or withdraw from the purchase. He should insist on a Carrez law measurement before signing and consult the condominium regulations.

3

Co-owner benefiting from a right of exclusive use

A co-owner has been using a common courtyard exclusively for 10 years. The general meeting decides to remove this right.

Application pratique:

The co-owner cannot object because the right of exclusive use is not a right of ownership. He must attend the general meeting to defend his interests.

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

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