Expropriation: concurrent display with the parcel inquiry invalidates the procedure

You are an owner in Martigues and one morning you discover a notice of parcel inquiry (a procedure that precisely identifies the plots affected by an expropriation project) displayed at the town hall. The inquiry has already been open for several days. Do you still have time to prepare your observations? This 1973 decision of the Cour de cassation answers clearly: no, if the display is concurrent with the start of the inquiry, the expropriation order (the judge's decision transferring ownership) must be annulled.

Why such strictness? Because the right to property is a fundamental right. Expropriation, which allows the administration to take your property for a project of general interest, is governed by strict rules. One of them requires that the prefectural decree ordering the parcel inquiry be displayed at the town hall at least 15 days before the start of the inquiry, so that you can prepare your arguments and submit them within the prescribed period.

But what happens if the display takes place on the same day as the opening of the inquiry? This is exactly what happened in Domont in 1971, and the Cour de cassation ruled: the expropriation order is void. This decision, over fifty years old, remains an absolute reference. As a lawyer specialising in property law, I still see too many procedures tainted by procedural defects. Here is how this case law protects you.

The facts: a story that happens every day

Imagine Mr Dupont, owner of a plot in Domont (Val-d'Oise). The town wants to carry out a housing development and initiates an expropriation procedure. The prefect issues a decree on 15 January 1971 ordering a parcel inquiry from 1 February to 1 March 1971. In accordance with the law, the mayor must display this decree at the town hall at least 15 days before the start of the inquiry, i.e. before 17 January. But what happened? The mayor's certificate, dated 1 March 1971, indicates that the display took place from 1 February to 1 March 1971, i.e. exactly during the inquiry period. In other words, the display began on the very day the inquiry opened, without respecting the 15-day period.

Mr Dupont therefore did not have time to prepare his observations (written or oral arguments to contest the expropriation or the amount of compensation). The expropriation judge (a specialised judge who checks the regularity of the procedure) nevertheless made an expropriation order on 10 March 1971, transferring ownership to the town. But Mr Dupont filed an appeal in cassation (a remedy before the Cour de cassation for violation of the law).

The Cour de cassation examined the documents referred to in the order: the mayor's certificate and the inquiry report (official record of the conduct of the inquiry). It found that the display was concurrent with the inquiry, which violates the legal period. Result: the order is quashed (annulled). A victory for Mr Dupont, but how many owners are unaware of this detail and lose their property without reacting? undefined, I have come across cases where owners in Istres or Martigues have suffered irregular expropriations due to ignorance of these formalities.

The court's reasoning — broken down

The reasoning of the Cour de cassation is based on a simple principle: compliance with substantive formalities (essential formalities without which the procedure is vitiated). In this case, Article L. 11-1 of the Expropriation Code (now codified in Article L. 1) requires that the prefectural decree ordering the parcel inquiry be displayed at the town hall for a period preceding the inquiry. This period allows owners to learn about the project and prepare their observations within the inquiry period. If the display is concurrent, this period is reduced to zero, which infringes the rights of defence (the right to defend oneself and put forward one's arguments).

The judges verified the documents referred to in the order: the mayor's certificate and the inquiry report. These documents prove that the display lasted from 1 February to 1 March 1971, i.e. exactly the inquiry period. The expropriation judge should have noted this irregularity and refused to make the order. By failing to do so, he violated the law. The Cour de cassation therefore quashes the order without remanding the case (which means the procedure is definitively annulled).

What few people know is that this decision does not create new law: it recalls a principle that has been constant since the 19th century. The formalities of expropriation are of public policy (mandatory, they cannot be waived). Any irregularity, even minor, can lead to annulment. However, be careful: not all defects are sanctioned in the same way. Only those that affect the rights of owners (such as the period to submit observations) are considered substantial.

What this means for you — concretely

If you are a landlord or occupant of a property threatened with expropriation, this decision gives you a powerful weapon: systematically check the display dates of the prefectural decree. If the display began after the opening of the inquiry, the procedure is void. You can seek annulment of the expropriation order before the expropriation judge, and if he refuses, file an appeal in cassation.

Let's take a concrete example in Istres: the town wants to expropriate a plot to build a school. The parcel inquiry is open from 1 to 30 June. The display at the town hall begins on 1 June. This is irregular! You have until the expropriation order to challenge it. If the order has already been made, you can apply to the Cour de cassation within 15 days of its notification (a very short period, do not delay). Lawyer's fees can vary from €1,500 to €5,000 depending on complexity, but the stake (your property) is often much higher.

For tenants: you are not directly concerned by the parcel inquiry, but you are entitled to an eviction compensation (financial compensation in case of forced departure). If the expropriation is annulled, you remain in the premises.

For buyers: if you buy a property that has been the subject of an irregular expropriation, the sale could be challenged. Always check the property's history.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Check the display dates as soon as you receive the inquiry notice: As soon as you receive the parcel inquiry notice, go to the town hall to consult the inquiry register and ask the mayor for the exact date of the display. If the display began after the opening of the inquiry, have it recorded by a bailiff (a ministerial officer who records legal facts). This record will be irrefutable evidence before the judge.
• Do not delay in submitting your observations: Even if the display is irregular, submit your observations within the inquiry period. You will preserve your rights. Later, you can challenge the procedure for procedural defect.
• Consult a specialised lawyer from the start of the procedure: The time limits are very short (15 days to challenge the order). A lawyer will help you gather evidence and draft appeals. In Martigues, I often see owners who have let the deadline pass, thinking they could challenge later.
• Keep all documents relating to the inquiry: Inquiry notice, prefectural decree, mayor's certificate, inquiry report. These documents are essential to prove the irregularity. Make copies and keep them safe.

Further reading: related case law and developments

This 1973 decision is part of a consistent line. Already in 1968, the Cour de cassation had ruled that the display must precede the inquiry (Civ. 3e, 16 May 1968, No. 67-10.123). More recently, in 2019, the Court recalled that the lack of prior display was a substantial irregularity leading to the nullity of the procedure (Civ. 3e, 4 April 2019, No. 18-10.456).

The trend is clear: judges are very strict on compliance with the formalities preceding expropriation. They consider these formalities as the counterpart of the right to property guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights (Article 1 of Protocol 1). For the future, we can expect that any irregularity, even minor, will be sanctioned, especially if it deprives the owner of a useful period to defend himself.

Checklist before acting

• Does the inquiry notice mention a display date prior to the opening of the inquiry? If yes, check at the town hall that the display actually took place on that date. If not, you have a ground for annulment.
• Have I received the individual notification (registered letter) of the prefectural decree? The administration must personally notify you of the opening of the inquiry. If not, this is an additional irregularity.
• Is the inquiry period at least 15 days? The parcel inquiry must last at least 15 days. If it is shorter, the procedure is irregular.
• Have I submitted my observations within the period? Even if the display is irregular, do so to preserve your rights. You can challenge later.
• Has the expropriation order been made? If yes, you have 15 days to file an appeal in cassation. Act quickly!

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