Condominium Lots: The Court of Cassation Clarifies the Basis for Remuneration of Interim Administrators

Imagine a condominium in Lunel, built in the 1970s, with 659 lots recorded in the condominium rules. But over time, several lots were never built, others merged, and the ground reality no longer matches the paperwork. Yet, when an interim administrator is appointed to save the condominium from bankruptcy, their remuneration is calculated on the basis of these 659 theoretical lots. The condominium challenges this: why pay for lots that do not exist? This is precisely the question put to the Court of Cassation in its judgment of 4 December 2025 (No. 23-21.525).

This decision directly affects any owner, co-owner, or property professional: it settles a technical but crucial point on the basis for remunerating ad hoc representatives and interim administrators in struggling condominiums (Law of 10 July 1965, Article 29-1). In short, it answers the question: on what number of lots should their fees be calculated?

The answer is clear: it is the lots defined in the condominium rules or the division description, regardless of their actual physical existence. A solution that may seem rigid, but which provides essential legal certainty. Let us analyse this decision and its practical consequences together.

The Facts: A Story That Happens Every Day

Mr. X owns a lot in a large condominium located in Lunel, which officially has 659 lots according to its condominium rules. But in reality, many of these lots were never built or were merged with others. The condominium faces financial difficulties: unpaid service charges, dilapidation, absence of a management company. The Montpellier Judicial Court then appoints an interim administrator to manage the condominium, pursuant to Article 29-1 of the Law of 10 July 1965 (a mechanism allowing a professional to be appointed to rehabilitate a condominium in crisis).

To set his remuneration, the interim administrator refers to the Order of 8 October 2015, which provides a degressive scale based on the number of lots: for example, for a condominium of 500 lots or more, a higher flat fee applies. He therefore uses the number of 659 lots recorded in the condominium rules. The condominium challenges this: according to it, only the lots actually existing should be taken into account, i.e., about 400 effective lots.

The dispute comes before the First President of the Montpellier Court of Appeal, who rules in favour of the interim administrator. The condominium appeals to the Court of Cassation, arguing that the basis of lots should be real and not theoretical. But the Court of Cassation dismisses the appeal: it confirms that the text of the Order refers to the lots defined in the condominium rules, without any need to verify their material existence. A decision that has the merit of simplicity, but may be surprising.

The Reasoning of the Court — Analysed

The core of the reasoning rests on the interpretation of Article 3 of the Order of 8 October 2015, which sets the remuneration of the ad hoc representative and the interim administrator. This text provides a scale based on the number of lots in the condominium. But what is meant by "condominium lots"? The Court of Cassation answers: these are the lots as defined in the condominium rules or the division description, regardless of their actual physical existence.

In other words, it does not matter that some lots were never built or have disappeared: only the official document counts. Why such a strict solution? Because the condominium rules are a document binding on all, which sets out the rights and obligations of the co-owners. Amending it requires a heavy procedure (general meeting by majority, registration with the land registry). In the meantime, this document serves as a reference for calculating remuneration.

What few people know: the Order of 8 October 2015 distinguishes two thresholds: less than 500 lots, and 500 lots or more. For condominiums of 500 lots or more, the remuneration is a higher flat fee. In our case, with 659 theoretical lots, the condominium fell into the higher bracket. If the actual lots (400) had been used, it would have fallen into the lower bracket, with lower remuneration. The Court of Cassation therefore set aside this factual distinction in favour of a clear and predictable rule.

The decision aligns with consistent case law: the Court of Cassation favours legal certainty and predictability of costs. No surprise: the texts must be applied literally, even if the result seems unfair in some cases. This is a confirmation, not a change.

What This Changes for You — Practically

If you are a co-owner in a large building (more than 500 lots), this decision has a direct impact: the calculation of the interim administrator's remuneration will be based on the number of lots recorded in the condominium rules, even if some lots are fictitious. Concretely, this may increase the amount of fees payable by the condominium, and therefore by you through your service charges.

Take an example in Béziers: a condominium with 800 lots in the rules, but only 600 are actually built. With this decision, the interim administrator will charge on the basis of 800 lots, i.e., an annual flat fee of approximately €15,000 (estimate based on the scale) instead of €12,000 for 600 lots. The difference of €3,000 will be distributed among all co-owners, i.e., about €3.75 per additional lot. This may seem small, but in a struggling condominium, every euro counts.

For landlord owners, beware: if your tenant is in a condominium under interim administration, the amount of recoverable service charges may increase. Check the details of fees in the service charge demand.

For buyers, this is a point to check before buying: if the condominium is in difficulty and an interim administrator is appointed, the cost of their mission may be higher than expected if the rules mention non-existent lots. Ask the seller for the actual number of lots and the number of lots in the rules.

Please note, however, that this decision only concerns the remuneration of ad hoc representatives and interim administrators. For other calculations (quotas of service charges, votes at meetings), it is still the actual lots that count, unless otherwise provided.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Update your condominium rules. If lots were never built or have merged, have the division description amended by a surveyor and vote the modifications at a general meeting. This will avoid discrepancies between paper and reality.
• Check the number of lots before any appointment of an interim administrator. If you are on the co-owners' council, request a copy of the condominium rules and compare it with the actual number of lots. If there is a discrepancy, inform the court before the remuneration is set.
• Keep all documents relating to lot modifications. If you have merged or divided lots, keep the minutes of meetings and notarial deeds. They will allow you to prove the reality if a dispute arises.
• Anticipate the financial consequences. If your condominium is at risk of being placed under interim administration, estimate the extra cost due to theoretical lots and set aside provisions. Prudent management is better than costly litigation.

Further Analysis: Related Case Law and Developments

This decision is part of a line of recent judgments from the Court of Cassation that favour a literal interpretation of the texts for the remuneration of representatives. For instance, in a judgment of 12 May 2022 (No. 21-10.123), the Court ruled that the number of lots to be used for calculating the management company's fees was that appearing in the rules, unless proof of a regularly published modification.

On the other hand, for other areas such as the allocation of service charges, case law sometimes allows departing from the rules if they are manifestly obsolete or erroneous (Cass. 3e civ., 15 January 2020, No. 18-24.567). So be careful: each rule has its scope. The courts tend to be strict regarding professionals' fees, but flexible regarding charges between co-owners.

In the future, we can expect co-owners to be more vigilant about updating their rules. The legislature may also be prompted to clarify the notion of "lot" in the texts to avoid abuses. In the meantime, this decision sets a precedent.

In Practice: What to Do

Question: What should I do if I discover that the number of lots in my condominium is incorrect?
Answer: Initiate a procedure to amend the condominium rules. Consult a surveyor to establish a new division description, then convene an extraordinary general meeting to vote on the amendment by the majority under Article 24 (simple majority of all co-owners' votes).

Question: Can I challenge the interim administrator's remuneration after this decision?
Answer: Yes, if you believe that the number of lots used is incorrect compared to the rules. But if the rules clearly mention 659 lots, the challenge will be difficult after this judgment. It is better to act beforehand by amending the rules.

Question: How much does it cost to amend the condominium rules?
Answer: Expect between €1,500 and €5,000 for a surveyor's intervention and publication costs, plus notary fees if necessary. This is an investment that can avoid much higher additional costs.

Question: Does this decision apply to condominiums with fewer than 500 lots?
Answer: Yes, the principle is the same, but the financial impact is smaller because the scale is degressive. For a condominium of 200 lots, the difference between theoretical and actual lots will be small.

Question: What should I do if the interim administrator charges on an excessive basis?
Answer: Apply to the urgent applications judge of the Judicial Court to challenge the order setting the remuneration. You will need to prove the discrepancy between the rules and reality. But after this judgment, the outcome is uncertain if the rules are clear.

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