Liability of the notary: when the cancellation of a promise to sell is not his fault

Imagine the scene: you are a homeowner in Allauch, a charming hilltop town near Marseille. You have signed a compromis de vente (a preliminary contract setting out the conditions of the sale) for your house. The buyer, enthusiastic, pays a deposit. Then, disaster: the sale falls through, and you lose months of waiting. You turn to the notary, believing he drafted the deed poorly. But is it really his fault?

This is precisely the question decided by the Court of Cassation in its judgment of 26 November 2014 (no. 13-27.965). A decision that reassures notaries, but should also make sellers and buyers think about their respective obligations.

In short, the highest French court said: if the cancellation of the compromis is due to the sellers' failure to provide the necessary information for the sale, the notary has not committed a fault. In other words, the legal professional cannot be held responsible for the failures of the parties. But what does this mean for you in practice? Let's dive into the details.

The facts: a story like many that happen every day

The case began in June 2006 in Plan-de-Cuques, another commune in the Bouches-du-Rhône. The D... spouses, sellers, signed a promise to sell (a compromis) with buyers, the E... spouses, for a property. The notary, Maître B..., drafted the deed. But quickly, problems arose: missing administrative documents, information about the property. The buyers, although fully informed according to the notary, were unable to complete the sale (sign the final deed). They then sued the sellers in court to obtain either forced sale or payment of the immobilisation indemnity (a penalty provided for in the compromis).

But the sellers did not take it lying down: they claimed against the notary, alleging that he had drafted the compromis poorly. According to them, if the deed had been correctly drawn up, the sale would have gone ahead. Did the first instance court rule in their favour? Not exactly. The Court of Appeal of Aix-en-Provence, and then the Court of Cassation, would analyse the situation carefully.

The twist: the Court of Appeal noted that the cancellation of the compromis was solely due to the sellers' failure in their duty to provide information. Indeed, the sellers had not provided the necessary documents (planning permission, surveys, etc.) before signing. The compromis had been signed urgently, to "fix the parties' intention" without waiting for the time needed to obtain the information. The notary, for his part, had correctly drafted the deed. Result: no fault of the notary, therefore no compensation.

The reasoning of the court — explained

How did the judges reach this conclusion? The legal basis is Article 1240 of the Civil Code (formerly 1382), which states that "any act of a person which causes harm to another obliges the person by whose fault it occurred to make reparation." In other words, to establish the notary's liability, three things must be proved: a fault, damage, and a causal link between the two.

In this case, the sellers criticised the notary for not including all the suspensive conditions in the compromis (clauses that condition the sale, such as obtaining a loan or administrative regularity). But the Court of Appeal found that the compromis stated that the buyers were "fully informed" and that the failure came from the sellers themselves. In short, it was not the drafting of the deed that caused the cancellation, but the sellers' lack of diligence.

What few people know is that the Court of Cassation upheld this reasoning, recalling that the notary is not a universal insurer. He must advise, check, but he cannot make up for the parties' inertia. However, be careful: this does not mean that notaries are always exonerated. If the notary had omitted a mandatory clause or had not informed the parties of the risks, his liability could have been established. But here, the deed was compliant.

What this means for you — in practice

For seller-owners, this decision is a warning: you must provide all the necessary documents for the sale before signing the compromis. If you do not, and the sale fails, you cannot turn around and blame the notary. Concrete example: in Plan-de-Cuques, if you sell a house with non-compliant drainage and you do not provide the survey, the buyer can withdraw. The notary will not be responsible.

For buyers, this decision also protects you: if the seller is in default, you can sue him to obtain damages (for example, reimbursement of your administrative costs, or compensation for the loss of a chance to acquire the property). But be careful: you must prove that you suffered loss. In this case, the buyers were not compensated because they had been informed and had accepted the risks.

For real estate professionals (agents, developers), this case law highlights the importance of documenting each stage of the transaction thoroughly. A well-drafted compromis with clear suspensive conditions can avoid many disputes.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Gather all documents before signing: technical surveys, planning permission, condominium regulations, etc. Never sign a compromis until these documents are available.
• Have the compromis checked by a solicitor: even if the notary is impartial, a solicitor specialising in property law can detect ambiguous clauses or omissions. The cost (a few hundred euros) is negligible compared to the risks.
• Negotiate precise suspensive conditions: if you need a loan, planning permission, or the lifting of an easement, insist that these conditions be written in black and white. And set realistic deadlines.
• Keep evidence of your exchanges: emails, letters, meeting minutes. In the event of a dispute, these can demonstrate that you were diligent and that the fault lies with the other party.

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

Further reading: related case law and developments

This decision is part of a consistent trend by the Court of Cassation to limit the notary's liability when he has not committed a personal fault. For example, in a judgment of 12 July 2012 (no. 11-20.114), the Court had already ruled that the notary is not required to check the buyer's solvency if the seller does not ask him to. Similarly, in a judgment of 9 October 2013 (no. 12-25.941), it exonerated the notary who had omitted to mention an easement in the deed, because it was known to the parties.

But be careful: the notary's liability remains engaged if he fails in his duty to advise. For example, if he does not warn you of the risks of a sale without a suspensive condition for a loan, he may be ordered to pay damages. The trend is therefore towards a balance: the notary must be professional, but he is not the guarantor of the parties' good faith.

In practice: what to do

Here is a checklist for sellers and buyers before signing a compromis:

1. Before signing: gather all documents (surveys, title deed, condominium regulations, etc.). Check that the compromis mentions all necessary suspensive conditions.
2. During signing: read each clause carefully. If anything seems unclear, ask the notary or your solicitor for explanations. Do not hesitate to add handwritten notes.
3. After signing: meet the deadlines to fulfil the suspensive conditions. If you are the seller, provide additional documents on time. If you are the buyer, proceed quickly with your loan application.
4. In case of dispute: do not rush to sue the notary. First analyse the cause of the failure. If it is due to the other party, take action against them. If it is due to a notary error, consult a solicitor to assess the chances of success.

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