Review by the Court of Appeal When Seized

Application pratique:

Under the Cass. 20 Feb 1991 ruling, the Paris Court of Appeal will not re-examine whether the contract was a 'sale of future thing' or a 'construction contract'. Instead, it will only annul the award if the outcome violates French public policy. Focus your challenge on demonstrating that the award permits a breach of mandatory construction insurance laws (e.g., Law Spinetta 78-12). File your annulment request at the Court of Appeal within one month of award notification (by 15 February 2024). Keep all technical reports and correspondence to prove the public policy violation.

Application pratique:

The decision of 20 February 1991 means the Lyon Court of Appeal will not reassess the arbitrator's classification of the contract but will verify if the award contravenes mandatory consumer protection rules. Your annulment application must pinpoint exactly how the award's resolution allows a violation of public policy—here, by effectively nullifying the mandatory delivery-date guarantees under the French Construction and Housing Code. Lodge your appeal within the strict one-month deadline (by 10 April 2024). Assemble all VEFA documents, delivery notices, and evidence of the public policy provisions breached.

Application pratique:

Based on the Cass. 1991 principle, the Aix-en-Provence Court of Appeal (with jurisdiction over Nice) will not reconsider whether the roof area was correctly designated as common or private. Annulment will only succeed if you prove that the award itself contravenes public policy—specifically, the absolute rule under Law 65-557 that any modification of common areas requires all co-owners' agreement. Focus your challenge on how the award's enforcement would flout this mandatory provision. File within one month (by 1 May 2024) and include the co-ownership rules, the arbitration award, and a precise citation of the statutory breach.