Expropriation: The Forgotten Right to Rehousing Can Block Your Eviction

Imagine: you have lived for thirty years in a house in Pont-Saint-Esprit, in the Gard. One day, you receive a letter: your neighbourhood is declared a public utility, your house is to be expropriated to build a new road. You wait for the compensation, you negotiate, and suddenly, the expropriating authority asks you to leave. But you have nowhere to go. What should you do? The question that every expropriated owner asks: can the expropriating authority evict me without having offered me rehousing?

The answer is no, as the Court of Cassation reminds us in a judgment of 27 February 2013 (No. 12-11.995). This decision, rendered in a Bordeaux case, has direct repercussions for expropriated persons throughout the country, including within the jurisdiction of Nîmes. It requires the expropriating authority to make two rehousing proposals before any eviction, even if the discussions on compensation are closed. Failing to comply with this obligation risks having the eviction refused by the judge.

For the inhabitants of Bagnols-sur-Cèze as for all owners, tenants or property professionals, this judgment is a valuable weapon. It protects occupants against brutal evictions and reminds us that the right to rehousing is not a mere formality. Analysis of a decision that could change your view on expropriation.

The Facts: A Story That Happens Every Day

In this case, owners (the X consorts) owned a building in Bordeaux, on land declared a public utility for a project of the Bordeaux urban community. Expropriation was inevitable, and the owners initiated proceedings to fix the compensation. The expropriation judge issued his order, and the owners appealed. But their appeal brief was filed out of time, and the Court of Appeal declared them barred from their appeal. Result: the compensation was definitively fixed, and the expropriating authority considered that the owners had to leave.

However, in parallel, the question of rehousing had never been resolved. The owners, who still occupied the premises, had received no rehousing proposal from the urban community. Yet Article L. 314-2 of the Urban Planning Code (which provides for the right to rehousing of expropriated persons) requires the expropriating authority to propose two dwellings meeting precise standards (size, comfort, adapted rent). The expropriating authority then applied to the judge for eviction of the occupants.

The Bordeaux Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the expropriating authority, holding that since the debate on compensation was closed, the owners had implicitly waived their right to rehousing. The owners then appealed to the Court of Cassation. The Court of Cassation had to decide: does the silence of the expropriated persons on rehousing during the compensation proceedings amount to a waiver?

The Reasoning of the Court — Analysed

The Court of Cassation quashed the Court of Appeal's decision, on the basis of Article L. 314-2 of the Urban Planning Code (which requires the expropriating authority to offer rehousing before eviction) and Article 455 of the Code of Civil Procedure (which requires judges to give reasons for their decisions). Its reasoning is clear: the right to rehousing is an autonomous right, distinct from the right to compensation. It can only be lost by an express and unequivocal waiver. However, the mere fact that the expropriated persons did not mention rehousing during the debates on compensation does not constitute such a waiver.

Concretely, the Court of Appeal had inferred a waiver from the silence of the expropriated persons. But the Court of Cassation reminds that waiver of a right is not presumed: it must be clear, unambiguous. In this case, the expropriated persons never said they waived rehousing. They simply contested the compensation, which is their right. The absence of a request for rehousing during the compensation proceedings does not mean they waive it for the future.

This decision confirms earlier protective jurisprudence for expropriated persons. It is part of a logic of protection of the right to housing, a constitutional value. The judges remind that the expropriating authority must take the first steps: it is up to it to propose two dwellings, not for the expropriated person to request them. If the expropriating authority does not do so, it cannot evict, even if the compensation is fixed. A lesson that the Bordeaux urban community learned to its cost.

What This Changes for You — Practically

If you are an expropriated owner, this decision offers you solid protection. The expropriating authority cannot put you out on the street overnight. Before any eviction, it must send you at least two rehousing proposals. These proposals must be for decent dwellings, corresponding to your needs (size, accessibility, maximum rent). If you refuse these offers, the expropriating authority can then apply for eviction. But without an offer, no eviction.

Take a concrete example: in Bagnols-sur-Cèze, an expropriated owner for a bypass road project receives compensation of €150,000. The expropriating authority asks him to vacate the premises within two months. The owner has no rehousing proposal. Thanks to this judgment, he can apply to the judge to suspend the eviction. The expropriating authority will be forced to find him suitable accommodation before taking any eviction measures.

For tenants of an expropriated property, the right to rehousing is even stronger: Article L. 314-1 of the Urban Planning Code offers them priority rehousing. But beware, this right is not automatic: it must be claimed. If you are a tenant and your home is expropriated, immediately demand a rehousing proposal. Do not rely on the expropriating authority to do it on its own.

For property professionals (developers, local authorities), this decision is a warning: do not neglect the rehousing aspect. A well-conducted expropriation procedure must include rehousing proposals upstream, otherwise judicial blockage may occur. Delays can extend by several months or even years if the judge is seized.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Demand rehousing proposals in writing: as soon as the expropriation order is notified, ask the expropriating authority to send you the two proposals provided for by law. Keep all evidence of your requests.
• Never waive your right orally: even if the compensation seems generous, do not say "I'll manage." The waiver must be written and signed to be valid. Mere silence can be used against you.
• Check the conformity of the proposed dwellings: habitable surface area, number of rooms, accessibility, rent. If the dwelling does not meet your needs (e.g., a two-room flat for a family of four), refuse by registered letter and demand a new proposal.
• Apply to the judge in summary proceedings if eviction is imminent: as soon as you receive a notice to quit without a rehousing proposal, consult a lawyer. The interim relief judge can suspend the eviction and order the expropriating authority to make offers.

Further Reading: Related Case Law and Developments

This judgment is part of a protective line. Already, in a judgment of 22 November 2005 (No. 04-70.039), the Court of Cassation had ruled that the right to rehousing must be proposed before the definitive fixing of compensation. The 2013 decision goes further: it specifies that even after the fixing of compensation, the absence of a rehousing proposal prevents eviction.

Since 2013, the courts have reinforced this requirement. For example, the Nîmes Court of Appeal, in a judgment of 10 September 2015, annulled an eviction for lack of a compliant rehousing proposal. The trend is clear: judges protect the occupant against abusive evictions.

For the future, it is likely that the legislature will specify the modalities of rehousing (time limits, content of offers). In the meantime, current case law offers security to expropriated persons. But beware: this right is not absolute. If the expropriated person refuses without legitimate reason several valid offers, eviction may be ordered.

Key Points to Remember

FAQ:

• Can the expropriating authority evict me without having offered me rehousing? No, the Court of Cassation prohibits it. Two rehousing proposals are mandatory before any eviction.
• What if I have received no proposal? Apply to the expropriation judge in summary proceedings to suspend the eviction. Consult a specialised lawyer.
• Does my silence on rehousing during the compensation proceedings make me lose my rights? No, the waiver must be explicit. Mere silence is not enough.
• Can I refuse a rehousing proposal? Yes, if it does not meet your needs (size, rent, location). But your refusal must be motivated and in writing.
• What are the time limits for obtaining rehousing? No precise legal time limit, but the expropriating authority must act within a reasonable time. In practice, count 3 to 6 months after the request.

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 →