Reference decision: cc • No. 10-15.551 • 2011-06-08 • View the decision →
Imagine you are the owner of a flat in a residential building in Mont-de-Marsan, with a magnificent common terrace reserved for the residents of your building. One day, water ingress appears and costly works become necessary. Who should pay? The entire co-ownership, or only the owners who benefit from this terrace? This very practical question arises in hundreds of co-ownerships in the Landes region, from Dax to Mont-de-Marsan.
In your daily life as an owner, you may have already faced this dilemma: when common areas only serve certain units, should all co-owners contribute to their maintenance? The answer is not always obvious, and disagreements can quickly escalate into costly conflicts. How to decide fairly?
The Cour de cassation, in its decision of 8 June 2011, provides a clear answer: when the co-ownership regulations create special common areas (common areas reserved for the exclusive use of certain co-owners), the corresponding charges must be allocated among their beneficiaries only. This decision, which directly concerns owners in the Landes region, deserves attention to avoid many troubles.
The facts: a story that happens every day
The story begins in a co-ownership divided into several blocks, with owners like Mr. Durand, holder of a flat in "block C" in Dax. The co-ownership regulations provided that the roof terrace of block C was a special common area, reserved exclusively for the owners of that building. For years, everything went well, until waterproofing problems appeared, requiring a complete refurbishment of this roof.
The co-owners' association, representing all the owners, then decided to launch the works and allocated their cost among all co-owners, regardless of their location in the residence. The owners of block C, including Mr. Durand, challenged this decision: why should they make their neighbours pay for works that only concern their building? They considered that only the beneficiaries of this roof terrace should bear the financial burden.
The disagreement grew, and the owners of block C brought legal proceedings. After an unfavourable first judgment, they appealed. The court of appeal ruled in their favour, considering that the creation of special common areas in the co-ownership regulations automatically led to the establishment of special charges. The association then lodged an appeal on points of law (pourvoi en cassation), but the highest court confirmed the decision of the lower courts. In other words, the refurbishment works for the roof terrace had to be financed solely by the owners of block C.
The court's reasoning — analysed
The judges of the Cour de cassation based their decision on a meticulous analysis of the co-ownership regulations and legal principles. They recalled that, according to Article 10 of the Law of 10 July 1965 (the text governing co-ownership), charges are allocated among co-owners based on the utility that the works present for each of them. In short, if a common area only serves certain people, only those should pay for its maintenance.
In this case, the co-ownership regulations had expressly created special common areas, like the roof terrace of block C. The Court considered that this creation logically entailed the establishment of special charges. It rejected the association's argument, which maintained that all common areas, even special ones, should be financed by the entire co-ownership. The judges emphasised that only the co-ownership regulations could determine the allocation of charges, and that in this case, they imposed a burden limited to the beneficiaries.
This reasoning confirms consistent case law: courts interpret co-ownership regulations strictly to ensure a fair allocation of charges. This is not a major evolution, but a rigorous application of existing principles. However, be careful: if the regulations had been silent on this point, the decision could have been different. What few people know is that the clarity of the regulations is often decisive in this type of dispute.
What this changes for you — practically
If you are a landlord owner in a co-ownership in Mont-de-Marsan, this decision directly concerns you. Imagine that your building has a lift reserved for your block, and that renovation works cost €20,000. Before this decision, you might have had to contribute to the financing even if you do not benefit from it. Now, only the owners of your block will have to pay, which can represent significant savings. undefined, I have encountered cases where owners saved several thousand euros thanks to such an interpretation.
For tenants, the impact is indirect but real: if your landlord has to assume special charges, this can influence the amount of service charges or maintenance works. For purchasers, it is crucial to check the co-ownership regulations before buying: special common areas can lead to unexpected expenses. If you are in this situation, you must carefully examine the clauses on charges and plan an appropriate budget.
Practically, for a typical co-ownership in the Landes region, this means that works on elements like roofs, internal courtyards, or reserved car parks must be financed by their users only. The time limits for appeal in case of disagreement are generally two months after the association's decision, and the amounts at stake can vary from a few hundred to several tens of thousands of euros, depending on the scale of the works.
Four tips to avoid this type of dispute
- Read your co-ownership regulations carefully before buying or voting in a general meeting, paying particular attention to the articles on common areas and the allocation of charges.
- Have a professional clarify any ambiguity in the regulations, especially regarding the definition of special common areas and their financial implications.
- Document decisions precisely in general meetings concerning works on special common areas, with detailed quotes and a clear allocation of costs.
- Anticipate conflicts by proposing, from the drafting or modification of the regulations, explicit clauses on the assumption of special charges.
Besoin d'un conseil personnalisé ? Contactez Maître Zakine — première consultation 30 min à 45€.
Further reading: related case law and developments
This decision fits into a coherent line of case law. For example, in an earlier judgment (Cour de cassation, 3rd civ., 6 July 2005, no. 03-20.023), the judges had already considered that charges relating to common areas with restricted use should be borne by their beneficiaries only. Similarly, a more recent decision (Cour de cassation, 3rd civ., 12 May 2016, no. 15-14.316) confirmed this principle by applying it to private car parks.
The trend in the courts is clear: they favour a strict interpretation of co-ownership regulations to guarantee fairness among co-owners. This means that, for the future, disputes on this subject will probably be decided in favour of a targeted allocation of charges. But what exactly does this change for new constructions? Developers will have to be even more precise in drafting regulations to avoid litigation.
Frequently asked questions
Q: How do I know if my regulations create special common areas?
A: Examine the articles that describe the common areas and look for mentions of "reserved for", "exclusive use" or "special". In case of doubt, consult a specialised solicitor.
Q: What should I do if the association wants me to pay for works on a special common area that I do not benefit from?
A: Challenge the decision in writing within two months, citing the case law of the Cour de cassation. If necessary, bring proceedings before the tribunal judiciaire.
Q: Does this rule also apply to current charges (cleaning, lighting)?
A: Yes, the principle is the same: charges, whether exceptional (works) or current, must be allocated according to the utility for each co-owner.
Q: Can the co-ownership regulations be modified to change the allocation of charges?
A: Yes, but this requires a vote in a general meeting with an absolute majority (Article 26 of the 1965 Law). A complex procedure that is best accompanied by a professional.
Do you find yourself 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 →
