Fraud and Administrative Acts: When a Lawyer Can Lose the Right to Practise

Imagine: you are the owner of a building in Beaumont, near Clermont-Ferrand. You obtained a planning permission after declaring that your land was not flood-prone. However, you knew it was. The town hall discovers this three years later, well after the time limit for appeal. Can it cancel your permission? The answer is yes, if fraud is proven. That is what the Cour de cassation ruled in a case concerning a lawyer from Strasbourg.

This 1983 decision is a cornerstone of administrative law. It establishes a simple principle: an act obtained by fraud can never create a vested right. Whether you are a lawyer, owner or developer, deception deprives you of any legal protection. A client once told me: "I lied on a document, but that was a long time ago, I'm safe." Unfortunately, no.

So, how does this rule apply in practice? And above all, how can you avoid finding yourself in this situation? That is what we will see, by dissecting the judgment and giving you practical advice, whether you live in Cournon-d'Auvergne or elsewhere.

The facts: a story that happens every day

Mr X, a lawyer at the Strasbourg Bar, was admitted to the Roll of the Order in 1975. To obtain this admission, he had produced a certificate of good character signed by a Bâtonnier, attesting that he had never been convicted of any offence contrary to honour. Problem: this certificate was false. Mr X had in fact been convicted a few years earlier for integrity offences.

In 1980, the Council of the Order discovered the deception. It decided to strike Mr X off the Roll, i.e. to remove his right to practise as a lawyer. Mr X contested this: he argued that the admission decision was an individual administrative act creating rights, and that after the expiry of the time limit for appeal (generally two months), it could no longer be withdrawn.

The Colmar Court of Appeal ruled against him, and the Cour de cassation confirmed this in 1983. The case lasted three years, from the striking-off to the final judgment. Mr X lost his right to practise, and his career came to an abrupt end. You may be wondering: "But isn't that too harsh? After all, he had practised honestly for five years?" The answer is no: the initial fraud vitiates the entire act.

The court's reasoning — dissected

The Cour de cassation relies on a general principle of administrative law: an individual administrative act creating rights (such as admission to the Roll, a planning permission, an operating authorisation) is in principle irrevocable after the expiry of the time limit for judicial review. This time limit is generally two months from the notification of the act.

But the Court adds a major exception: if the act was obtained by fraud, it may be withdrawn at any time. Why? Because fraud prevents the creation of a legitimate right. In other words, "fraud corrupts everything" (fraus omnia corrumpit, in Latin). The perpetrator of the fraud cannot rely on his own turpitude to retain a benefit.

Specifically, the judges checked two things: first, that Mr X had indeed lied about his criminal record; second, that this lie had been decisive for his admission. Without this fraudulent certificate, the Council of the Order would never have enrolled him. The Court therefore considered that the admission was void ab initio (from the outset).

This decision confirms consistent case law: the administration can always revoke an act tainted by fraud, regardless of the time elapsed. This is a powerful weapon for injured third parties, but also a safeguard against abuse.

What this means for you — in practical terms

If you are a landlord in Cournon-d'Auvergne, you rent out a flat and, to obtain a rental permit, you declared that the dwelling was decent when it was not. The tenant discovers the deception three years later. He can request the cancellation of the permit and damages. You risk having to repay part of the rents received and pay penalties.

For a buyer: you buy a house in Beaumont. The seller hides from you that he obtained planning permission for an extension by fraudulently misrepresenting the floor area. Later, the town hall withdraws the permission. You end up with an illegal construction. You can sue the seller for misrepresentation (dol), but the initial fraudulent act can be withdrawn at any time.

For a co-owner: the managing agent obtained a works authorisation by presenting a false minutes of the general meeting. Even if the authorisation was granted five years ago, it can be withdrawn. You can challenge the works carried out and demand their reinstatement.

If you are in this situation, you must act quickly: gather evidence of the fraud (falsified documents, witness statements, emails) and refer the matter to the administrative court. The limitation periods are long (up to 5 years in civil matters), but the longer you wait, the more complicated the situation becomes.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Check your documents before signing them: never declare information you know to be false, even if it seems trivial. An incorrect statement about a surface area, a date or a situation may be classified as fraud.
• Keep the originals of all your administrative acts: permits, authorisations, certificates. In the event of a dispute, you will be able to prove their content.
• If you discover fraud committed by a third party, act quickly: refer the matter to the administration or the court as soon as possible. The longer you delay, the more likely the administration will rely on legal certainty to maintain the act.
• Consult a lawyer before challenging an old act: proving fraud is difficult. A professional will help you identify the determining elements and meet procedural deadlines.

Further reading: related case law and developments

This 1983 decision is part of a line of judgments that protect legality against fraud. For example, the Conseil d'État, in a 1950 case "Dame Lamotte", had already established the principle that fraud is an exception to the irrevocability of acts. More recently, in 2020, the Conseil d'État ruled that a planning permission obtained by a false declaration about the applicant's identity could be withdrawn even after 10 years.

The trend in the courts is therefore constant: fraud is a defect that renders the act void ab initio. However, the burden of proof lies with the person alleging fraud. He must demonstrate the intention to deceive and the decisive nature of the lie.

For the future, we can expect judges to be even stricter with professionals (lawyers, notaries, estate agents) who commit fraud in the course of their business. Public trust is at stake.

In practice: what to do

FAQ:

Can I challenge a planning permission obtained fraudulently 5 years ago? Yes, if you prove the fraud. The administration may withdraw it at any time, but you must act quickly to prevent the works from being completed.

What if the administration refuses to withdraw a fraudulent act? You can refer the matter to the administrative court to seek the annulment of the act. You have a two-month time limit from the refusal.

What are the risks for the perpetrator of the fraud? In addition to the withdrawal of the act, he may be criminally prosecuted for forgery and use of forgery, fraud, etc. Penalties can be up to 5 years' imprisonment and a fine of €375,000.

Must the fraud be intentional? Yes, a deliberate intention to deceive must be demonstrated. A simple material error is not sufficient.

Can I be protected if I bought in good faith a property obtained by fraud? Yes, the law protects third parties acting in good faith. But you may be required to reinstate the property if the fraud is discovered.

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