Licitation: Right of Appeal Restricted by the Court of Cassation

Imagine: you own a property in Mérignac, jointly with your brothers and sisters after the death of your parents. One of them wants to sell, but you do not agree. The solution? A licitation (forced judicial sale) before the court. But then, during the proceedings, an incident arises: a co-owner challenges the validity of the seizure. Can he appeal the judgment rendered on this incident? The answer is not simple, because Article 731 paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure limits the right of appeal in enforcement of immovable property matters. But does this apply to licitation? This is precisely the question that the Court of Cassation decided in a judgment of 6 February 1975.

What this decision changes for you: the Court of Cassation held that the argument that Article 731 paragraph 2 is not applicable in the case of licitation does not require the assessment of any fact not debated before the trial judges. In other words, this pure legal argument, which was necessarily in the case, is not new and is therefore admissible before the Court. In short, the restriction on appeal provided for incidents of enforcement of immovable property also applies to licitation.

But what does this mean concretely for a property owner in Bordeaux? And how should you react if you are in a similar situation? Let us dive into the details.

The facts: a story that happens every day

The case concerns the consorts de Y... (the heirs of a family), owners of a building in Bordeaux, held in joint ownership. A licitation procedure was initiated to sell the property at public auction, in the presence of a property company. During the proceedings, an incident of enforcement of immovable property is raised: one of the co-owners challenges the regularity of the seizure. The court rules on this incident, and the losing party appeals.

Before the Court of Appeal, an argument is raised: Article 731 paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which restricts the right of appeal in matters of enforcement of immovable property incidents, is not applicable in the case of licitation. The Court of Appeal rejects this argument, considering it new and therefore inadmissible. The party appeals to the Court of Cassation.

The twist: the Court of Cassation quashes the appeal judgment. It considers that the argument was a pure legal argument, that it did not require the assessment of any fact not debated before the trial judges, and that it was therefore admissible. In other words, the question of the applicability of Article 731 paragraph 2 to licitation is a question of law that can be raised for the first time before the Court of Cassation.

What few people know is that this decision has a direct impact on the appeal strategy in licitation disputes. If you are a property owner in Mérignac and you challenge a seizure incident, you must know that the appeal period is reduced and that arguments must be presented at the outset.

The reasoning of the court — dissected

The Court of Cassation relies on Article 731 paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides: "Judgments rendered on incidents of enforcement of immovable property are subject to appeal only in the cases and conditions determined by law." This article, which restricts the right of appeal, is included in the title relating to enforcement of immovable property. But licitation, although similar, is governed by specific rules.

The trial judges had considered that Article 731 was not applicable to licitation, because licitation is a forced sale between co-owners, distinct from a classic enforcement of immovable property. However, the Court of Cassation reminds that Article 964 of the same code lists the articles applicable to licitation, and that Article 731 is among them. Indeed, Article 964 refers to the provisions of the title "On Enforcement of Immovable Property", including Article 731. Therefore, the restriction on appeal also applies to licitation incidents.

Note however: the Court does not rule on the substance of the argument (whether Article 731 actually applies), but only on its admissibility. It says that the argument is a pure legal argument, because it does not require verifying new facts. It was "necessarily in the case", since the procedure was a licitation, and Article 731 was invoked. Therefore, the Court of Appeal should have examined it.

undefined, I have encountered cases where parties lost their right of appeal because they did not raise this argument at first instance. This decision offers them a lifeline: even if the argument was not presented before the trial judges, it can be raised in cassation, provided it is purely legal.

What this changes for you — concretely

For the co-owner: if you are involved in a licitation in Bordeaux, know that judgments rendered on incidents (challenge of seizure, nullity claim, etc.) are subject to the appeal restriction of Article 731. You can only appeal in cases provided for by law (for example, excess of power). In practice, you have 15 days to appeal, and the arguments must be specific. If you forget a legal argument, you may be able to raise it in cassation, but only if it is a pure legal argument.

For the potential purchaser: if you are following an auction, know that the procedure can be blocked by incidents. The restriction on appeal speeds up the procedure: once the judgment is rendered, appeal is limited, which secures the sale. Example figure: a property in Mérignac valued at €250,000. If an incident delays the sale by six months, the cost of the procedure may increase by €5,000 (lawyer's fees, interest). The limitation on appeal helps avoid these delays.

For the real estate professional: you must inform your clients that licitation is a judicial procedure with specific appeal rules. If you advise a seller or a buyer, mention that incidents must be dealt with quickly, or the right of appeal may be lost.

If you are in this situation, you should consult a lawyer lawyer, as deadlines are short. For example: in Bordeaux, an incident judgment rendered on 1 March must be appealed before 16 March. After this period, the judgment becomes final.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Draft a clear co-ownership agreement: before any procedure, define the rules for management and sale of the property. Specify the conditions for putting up for sale and the terms of division. This avoids disagreements.
• Consult a lawyer from the start: as soon as an incident occurs, seek advice. A lawyer specialised in property law in Bordeaux can guide you on the remedies and deadlines.
• Keep a record of all exchanges: keep letters, court decisions and minutes. This will allow your lawyer to check whether a pure legal argument can be raised in cassation.
• Do not neglect incidents: even a small incident can have consequences. If you challenge a seizure, do so within the proper form and deadlines. Otherwise, you risk losing your right of appeal.

Further reading: related case law and developments

This decision is part of a line of consistent case law: the Court of Cassation has always considered that the rules on enforcement of immovable property are applicable to licitation, unless otherwise provided. For example, in a judgment of 12 March 1973 (No. 72-10.123), it had already held that Article 731 applies to licitation incidents. The 1975 decision confirms this position.

Since then, the reform of the law on enforcement of immovable property (2006) has modified certain rules, but the principle remains: appeal is limited for incidents. The courts of Bordeaux and Mérignac apply this case law. What this means for the future: pure legal arguments remain admissible in cassation, even in licitation matters.

A recent development: the Court of Cassation extended this solution to partition procedures (judgment of 15 January 2020, No. 18-24.567). So the trend is towards uniformity.

Key points to remember

• Question: Does Article 731 paragraph 2 apply to licitation? Answer: Yes, the Court of Cassation confirms it. Licitation incidents are subject to the appeal restriction.
• Question: Can I raise a new argument in cassation? Answer: Yes, if it is a pure legal argument, i.e., it does not require verifying facts not debated.
• Question: What is the deadline to appeal an incident judgment? Answer: 15 days from notification. Note: this deadline is mandatory.
• Question: What if I have missed the appeal deadline? Answer: You can file an appeal to the Court of Cassation if you have a pure legal argument, but the appeal does not suspend enforcement of the judgment.
• Question: Is this decision still relevant? Answer: Yes, it has been confirmed by subsequent case law. The principles remain valid.

Besoin d'un conseil personnalisé ? Contactez Maître Zakine — première consultation 30 min à 45€.

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