Aller au contenu principal
Droit Immobilier

Is deemed unwritten, pursuant to

📅 Décision du 18 December 2002⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 2 vues📖 2 min de lecture

Pursuant to Article 43 of the Law of 10 July 1965, a clause in a co-ownership regulation providing that the functions of a member of the syndicate council could only be exercised by co-owners who were up to date with their financial obligations towards the syndicate is deemed unwritten, since any co-owner may be appointed by the general meeting as a member of the syndicate council under the mandatory provisions of Article 21 of the same law.

Reference decision: cc • N° 01-12.269 • 2002-12-18 • Consult the decision →

This decision provides important insight into your property law. Here is what it changes for you.

The situation

Pursuant to Article 43 of the Law of 10 July 1965, a clause in a co-ownership regulation providing that the functions of a member of the syndicate council could only be exercised by co-owners who were up to date with their financial obligations towards the syndicate is deemed unwritten, since any co-owner may be appointed by the general meeting as a member of the syndicate council under the mandatory provisions of Article 21 of the same law.

What the law says

This decision confirms the fundamental principles of property law.

Points to remember

  • Strictly comply with the legal time limits for appeals
  • Keep all your supporting documents (title deeds, deeds, correspondence)
  • Anticipate: preventive advice always costs less than litigation

For an analysis of your situation: 30-minute consultation at €45 with Maître Zakine.

📌 Does this apply to your situation? Maître Cécile Zakine, French real estate lawyer, practises throughout France.
→ Prendre RDV pour une consultation droit du travail  |  → Browse all our legal articles

Informations juridiques

  • Numéro: 01-12.269
  • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
  • Date de décision: 18 décembre 2002

Mots-clés

droit immobilierjurisprudenceimmobilier

Cas d'usage pratiques

1

Co-owner in arrears barred from council

You own a flat in a 12-unit building in Lyon. The co-ownership regulation states that only owners who are up to date with service charges can sit on the syndicate council. You have fallen behind by €850 over six months due to a dispute over heating costs, and the property manager refuses to register your candidacy for the council at the next annual general meeting.

Application pratique:

The 2002 Court of Cassation ruling (n° 01-12.269) deems any such clause unwritten, because Article 21 of the 1965 law allows any co-owner to be appointed to the council regardless of payment status. You should insist in writing that your candidacy be accepted, citing this case law. If the manager or other owners object, you can challenge the refusal before the tribunal judiciaire (French civil court). Keep a copy of the regulation and your correspondence.

2

Landlord with tenant arrears barred from council

You let out a studio in a co-owned building in Toulouse. Your tenant stopped paying rent three months ago, so you are €1,200 behind on your own service charge contributions. The syndic (property manager) points to a clause in the building regulations requiring council members to have no outstanding charges, and tells you that you cannot be elected as a council member at the upcoming annual general meeting.

Application pratique:

This clause is unwritten under the Court of Cassation decision of 18 December 2002 (n° 01-12.269): any co-owner, regardless of financial situation, may be elected to the syndicate council because Article 21 of the 1965 law is mandatory. You should send a formal recorded delivery letter (lettre recommandée) to the syndic quoting the case and demanding that your name be put forward for election. If the general meeting votes to exclude you, the decision can be annulled in court within two months. Do not let the unpaid charges prevent you from exercising your statutory right.

3

First-time buyer faces invalid eligibility clause

You have just bought a flat in a 1970s co-ownership in Bordeaux. When reviewing the règlement de copropriété (co-ownership rules) before purchase, you notice a clause stating that only co-owners who have paid all charges for the past two years may stand for the syndicate council. As a new owner with no history, the syndic interprets this as making you ineligible for the first two years.

Application pratique:

This condition is unenforceable: the Court of Cassation (n° 01-12.269, 18 December 2002) ruled that such clauses are deemed unwritten because Article 21 of the 1965 law gives every co-owner the right to be elected to the council. You can immediately put yourself forward as a candidate at the next annual general meeting. If challenged, cite the case and remind the syndic that the clause has no legal effect. You do not need to wait two years or prove any payment history.

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.

★★★★★4.9/5 — Google Reviews

Does this affect you?

Consult Maître Zakine — lawyer, Doctor of Law. Fast, clear answer.

Book a consultation →

🔒 Confidential · No obligation

📬 Get legal updates

One legal analysis per week, straight to your inbox. Free, no spam.

🔒 1-click unsubscribe · GDPR compliant

Articles similaires en Immobilier

Voir tout →

Litige immobilier : comprendre vos droits et recours

Selon l'article 9 de la loi du 10 juillet 1965 fixant le statut de la copropriété des immeubles bâtis, chaque copropriétaire use et jouit librement des parties privatives comprises dans son lot, sous la condition de ne porter atteinte ni aux droits des autres copropriétaires, ni à la destination de l'immeuble. Encourt la cassation pour violation de la loi l'arrêt qui énonce qu'il résulte de l'examen des actes que les copropriétaires, lors de la mise en copropriété, ont entendu affecter une partie de l'immeuble non à un simple usage commercial non défini, mais à destination de garage, alors qu'un changement de la nature de l'activité commerciale dans un lot où le règlement de copropriété autorise l'exercice du commerce n'implique pas, par lui-même, une modification de la destination de l'immeuble et peut s'effectuer librement, sous réserve de ne porter atteinte ni aux droits des autres copropriétaires ni à des limitations conventionnelles justifiées par la destination de l'immeuble

09 sept. 2026Lire →

Droit de la propriété : cadre légal et solutions

DOIT ETRE CASSE L'ARRET QUI REJETTE UNE DEMANDE TENDANT AU RETABLISSEMENT DANS LEUR ETAT PRIMITIF D'UN MAGASIN ET D'UN APPARTEMENT QUI, CONSTITUANT UN LOT DANS UN IMMEUBLE EN COPROPRIETE, ONT ETE REUNIS PAR LEUR PROPRIETAIRE EN UN LOCAL COMMERCIAL UNIQUE, BIEN QUE LE REGLEMENT DE COPROPRIETE DISPOSE QUE LES APPARTEMENTS NE POURRONT ETRE OCCUPES QUE BOURGEOISEMENT.

09 sept. 2026Lire →

Jurisprudence immobilière : analyse et conseils pratiques

Justifie légalement sa décision la Cour d'appel qui, pour dire une gérante de société civile immobilière responsable des frais de financement de l'installation thermique de l'immeuble, retient, par interprétation souveraine exclusive de dénaturation des termes ambigüs des conventions, que le rapprochement du règlement de copropriété, des actes de réservation et de vente autorise les copropriétaires acquéreurs à prétendre qu'ils ont acquis les installations thermiques sans avoir à payer de supplément de prix et que la gérante qui devait donner au notaire tous renseignements utiles pour rédiger les actes de vente est responsable des lacunes de ceux-ci.

09 sept. 2026Lire →

Explorez plus d'analyses juridiques en droit immobilier

Tous les articles 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