The employment contract of an employee of the

Application pratique:

This case law confirms that the caretaker's employment contract is not an annex to the general meeting minutes under Decree No. 67-223, so the co-owner has no right to a full copy. Instead, review the annual accounts showing personnel costs and the AG resolution approving the salary. Raise concerns at the next AG to propose a contract renegotiation, and within two months of the AG, contest any abusive resolution by focusing on the vote's validity rather than demanding the contract.

Application pratique:

Per this ruling, the caretaker's contract is not a document that must be provided to co-owners or prospective buyers. Focus on legally accessible documents: the règlement de copropriété, carnet d'entretien, three years' AG minutes and accounts. The charges linked to the caretaker appear as 'personnel costs' in the accounts. Insist on a written statement from the syndic detailing the caretaker's monthly cost and any upcoming salary changes. If doubts remain, negotiate a special condition in the sale agreement based on satisfactory disclosure of these cost details.

Application pratique:

This decision makes clear you cannot force disclosure of the contract. To challenge the salary, act swiftly within two months of receiving the AG minutes. Scrutinise the vote's compliance with notice rules and the applicable majority under the règlement de copropriété. Argue that the increase is disproportionate based on the budget and market rates without needing the full contract. Keep all correspondence and the AG notice as proof of potential procedural flaws. Next time, raise objections at the AG itself and vote against any excessive increase.