Reference decision: cc • No. 69-13.474 • 1970-12-16 • View the decision →
This decision provides important insight into your property law. Here is what it changes for you.
The situation
THE APPEAL, BROUGHT BY A CONTRACTOR, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT RULING ON THE CLAIM FOR TERMINATION OF THE CONTRACT, INTRODUCED AGAINST HIM BY THE PROJECT OWNER, DOES NOT CALL INTO QUESTION THE CLAIM FOR TERMINATION OF A SEPARATE CONTRACT, BROUGHT BY THE LATTER AGAINST THE ARCHITECT. FURTHERMORE, SINCE THE DEFENDANTS, BETWEEN WHOM THERE IS NO LEGAL RELATIONSHIP, DID NOT MAKE CLAIMS AGAINST EACH OTHER AT FIRST INSTANCE, THE APPEAL BROUGHT BY THE PROJECT OWNER AGAINST THE ARCHITECT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A CROSS-APPEAL TRIGGERED BY THE MAIN APPEAL, ADMISSIBLE AT ANY STAGE OF PROCEEDINGS.
What the law says
This decision confirms the fundamental principles of property law.
Key takeaways
- Strictly comply with statutory time limits for appeals
- Keep all supporting documents (title deeds, instruments, 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
