Tree Pruning from Neighbour's Trees: The Owner's Imprescriptible Right Confirmed by the Court of Cassation

Imagine yourself in Juan-les-Pins, enjoying your swimming pool in the sun... when suddenly, a branch from the neighbour's huge pine tree falls onto your terrace. Or in Cagnes-sur-Mer, where the roots of an oleander crack the wall of your garage. Every day, owners wonder: do I have the right to cut these branches that encroach onto my property? And what if the neighbour refuses? How far can I go?

The answer is clear: the owner's right to cut branches that overhang their property is imprescriptible, meaning it never expires, even after many years. The Court of Cassation forcefully reiterated this on 30 June 2010 (decision no. 09-16.257). It overturned a court of appeal that had rejected the pruning request on the grounds that the owner had allegedly abused their right by taking action. In other words: no need to prove an abnormal disturbance to demand the cutting of branches.

But what if a century-old tree blocks your view or dead branches threaten your roof? This article deciphers the decision and gives you the keys to act, without falling into legal traps.

The Facts: A Story Like Many Others

Mr. and Mrs. V., owners of a villa in Juan-les-Pins, live next to Mr. and Mrs. R.'s land. For years, a large oak tree planted on the latter's property has been extending its branches over the V.'s swimming pool. Every autumn, leaves clog the filter, and a large branch nearly injured a child. Tired of it, the V.'s ask their neighbours to prune the tree at the property boundary. Flat refusal: "This tree has been here forever; you bought with full knowledge."

The V.'s then sue the R.'s before the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Grasse, based on Article 673 of the Civil Code (which allows requiring the cutting of branches encroaching onto one's land). At first instance, the court orders pruning. But the R.'s appeal. The Court of Appeal of Aix-en-Provence, in a decision of 15 January 2009, reverses the judgment. It considers that the V.'s cannot, without making their action degenerate into an abuse, request the reduction of the tree's foliage, because they bought the property when the tree already existed and the disturbances were old and pre-existed the construction of the pool.

The V.'s appeal to the Court of Cassation. On 30 June 2010, the Court of Cassation quashes the appeal decision. It holds that the court of appeal violated Article 673 of the Civil Code by adding a condition that the text does not provide for: the absence of abuse of the right to act. In short, the right to demand the cutting of branches that extend onto one's land is absolute and does not depend on the age of the disturbance or the date of acquisition.

The Reasoning of the Court — Explained

Article 673 of the Civil Code provides: "The person on whose property the branches of trees, shrubs, or bushes of the neighbour extend may compel the neighbour to cut them." This is a potestative right: the owner may exercise it without condition, unless the law or an agreement provides otherwise. The Court of Cassation reminds: no restriction may be placed on this imprescriptible right.

In this case, the court of appeal erred by requiring the owner to prove an abnormal neighbourhood disturbance (Article 1240 of the Civil Code, which requires reparation for damage caused by fault). However, pruning is not a liability action: it is a real action, attached to the right of ownership itself. It does not matter that the tree is old, that the owner bought with full knowledge, or that the branches cause only a minor inconvenience. The mere fact that the branches encroach onto the neighbouring land suffices.

The Court also specifies that the fact that the disturbances predate the construction of the pool is irrelevant. In other words, you may well buy a house with a tree whose branches overhang your land, and then demand pruning. This right never expires, even if you have allowed it for years. However, note: this right applies only to branches, not to roots. For roots, Article 673 paragraph 2 provides a different regime (the owner may cut the roots that encroach themselves, but cannot require the neighbour to cut them).

In summary, the Court of Cassation censured the court of appeal for adding a condition of abuse of the right to act. It reaffirms that Article 673 is a matter of public policy: the owner may always require pruning, without having to demonstrate a particular prejudice.

What This Changes for You — Practically

For the owner suffering an encroachment: you now have an unbeatable weapon. If the branches of the neighbour's tree extend onto your land, you can require the neighbour to cut them at their expense, without having to prove that it causes you damage. For example, in Cagnes-sur-Mer, Mrs. D. had a beautiful olive tree on her property, but the branches of a neighbouring eucalyptus obstructed the sea view. She obtained the pruning in court, even though the view was not an absolute right. Cost of proceedings: about €2,000 in lawyer's fees, but pruning was ordered.

For the owner of the tree: you cannot oppose the request, even if the tree is a century old. However, you can choose to cut the branches yourself (at your expense) or let the neighbour do it. If the neighbour cuts without authorisation, they may be liable if the cutting is abusive (e.g., a sick tree that dies). But generally, the neighbour has the right to cut the branches up to the property boundary, without notifying you.

For the buyer: before buying a property, check the condition of neighbouring trees. If branches encroach, you can still act after the purchase. But be careful: if you accept a right of way or an easement of view, you might waive this right. Have a notary verify.

For the tenant: you can act against the neighbour owner, but it is preferable to inform your landlord. Generally, it is the owner of the leased building who exercises this right, as it pertains to the property itself.

Deadline: the limitation period for the action is 30 years (real property right). But the longer you wait, the more a judge might consider that you have tolerated the situation. Even though the Court of Cassation says the right is imprescriptible, in practice, tolerance over several decades could be interpreted as an abandonment of right. Better to act quickly.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Send a registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt to your neighbour informing them that their branches encroach and asking them to cut them within 15 days. Attach photos. This is the first step before any legal action.
• Have the encroachment recorded by a bailiff (cost: about €150-200). This record will be evidence in court and prove the extent of the encroachment.
• Propose an amicable solution: share the pruning costs, or agree for you to cut the branches yourself. A written agreement can avoid years of proceedings.
• Consult a lawyer specialising in property law before filing a claim. A lawyer can assess the strength of your case and guide you towards mediation if necessary. Maître Zakine, for example, offers a first consultation for €45.

Further Reading: Related Case Law and Developments

The decision of 30 June 2010 is part of a consistent line of the Court of Cassation. Already in a decision of 21 October 2009 (no. 08-19.506), the Court held that the owner can require the cutting of branches even if the tree was planted before their acquisition. More recently, the Court reminded that the right to cut roots is more limited (decision of 15 March 2018, no. 16-24.648): the owner may cut the roots themselves, but cannot compel the neighbour to do so.

The trend of the courts is therefore clear: the right to pruning is almost absolute, while the right regarding roots is more nuanced. For the future, we can expect the Court to further protect the right of ownership, except in cases of manifest abuse (e.g., cutting branches solely to harm the neighbour).

Key Points to Remember

• Can I require the cutting of branches without proving a disturbance? Yes, the right is absolute (Art. 673 of the Civil Code).
• What if the tree is a century old? Irrelevant, the right is imprescriptible.
• Can I cut the branches myself? Yes, you can cut them up to the property boundary, at your expense. But be careful not to damage the tree.
• What if the neighbour refuses? Send a formal notice, then apply to the judicial court. You can also request mediation.
• Is there a deadline to act? The action is subject to a 30-year limitation period. But act quickly to avoid giving the impression of tolerance.

Besoin d'un conseil personnalisé ? Contactez Maître Zakine — première consultation 30 min à 45€.

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