Aller au contenu principal
Litigious withdrawal: when the assignment of a debt allows the termination of a property dispute
Droit-immobilier

Litigious withdrawal: when the assignment of a debt allows the termination of a property dispute

📅 Décision du 16 June 1993⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 7 vues📖 6 min de lecture

This 1993 decision of the Court of Cassation clarifies the conditions of litigious withdrawal: a purchaser can substitute himself for the assignee of a debt to extinguish an action for rescission of the sale, provided that the debt is disputed and that the assignor has been paid.

Reference decision: cc • No. 91-17.446 • 1993-06-16 • View decision →

You sell a plot of land in Reims. The purchaser does not pay. You sue for rescission of the sale (cancellation for non-payment). But on the same day, you assign your debt (the right to claim the price) to a third-party company. Your purchaser, learning of the assignment, notifies you of a "litigious withdrawal" (Article 1699 of the Civil Code): he reimburses you the price you claim from him, and substitutes himself for the assignee to terminate the proceedings.

Is this legal? Does the litigious withdrawal allow a dishonest buyer to escape his debts by buying his own debt? The Court of Cassation answers: yes, but only if the debt is disputed and the assignor has been paid. Explanation.

The facts: a story like many others

In 1985, the X family (sellers) sold a plot of land in Tinqueux to SCI Campo di Fiori. The price was not paid. The sellers sued for rescission of the sale before the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Reims. On the same day, they assigned their price debt (the right to obtain payment) to SCI César Matignon.

SCI Campo di Fiori learned of the assignment. It then invoked litigious withdrawal: it appeared before SCI César Matignon and reimbursed the amount of the assigned debt, thus substituting itself for it in the rescission proceedings. The goal? To extinguish the sellers' action, since the debt was now extinguished by payment to the assignee.

The sellers contested: they argued that litigious withdrawal was not possible because the debt was not "litigious" (disputed) at the time of the assignment, and that one of the assignors had not been fully paid. The Court of Appeal of Reims ruled in favour of the purchaser. Appeal to the Court of Cassation.

The reasoning of the court — dissected

The Court of Cassation upheld the judgment of the Court of Appeal. It recalled that litigious withdrawal, provided for in Article 1699 of the Civil Code (which allows the person against whom a litigious right is assigned to free himself by reimbursing the assignment price), is admissible as long as the debt is disputed at the time of the withdrawal. Here, the action for rescission of the sale demonstrates that payment is disputed. The debt is therefore litigious.

The Court also noted that one of the assignors had been fully paid (he received his share), and that the nature of the debt of another had been modified (it became a debt of restitution). It concluded that the rescission of the sale is disputed, which makes the withdrawal regular.

In other words, litigious withdrawal is not an abuse: it is a mechanism that allows the purchaser to end the proceedings by paying the debt to the assignee, provided that the assignor had not been fully paid before the assignment. Here, one of the sellers had already been paid, which made the debt partially extinguished, but that did not prevent the withdrawal for the remaining part.

What this means for you — concretely

If you are a seller of a plot of land or real estate: you must be extremely careful if you assign your price debt to a third party. Before assigning, ensure that the purchaser has not already disputed the sale. Otherwise, he will be able to exercise litigious withdrawal and extinguish your action for rescission, often at a lower cost for him. Example: you sell a plot of land in Tinqueux for €200,000, the purchaser does not pay. You assign your debt to a collection agency for €150,000. The purchaser can then reimburse you these €150,000 and put an end to your proceedings. You lose €50,000.

If you are a purchaser: litigious withdrawal is a powerful defensive weapon. If a seller sues you for rescission and assigns his debt, you can substitute yourself for the assignee by reimbursing the assignment price. This allows you to end the proceedings and keep the property, provided you have the funds. Caution: this only works if the debt was disputed before the assignment.

If you are an assignee (SCI or investor): always check whether the purchaser has already initiated a dispute. Otherwise, your acquisition risks being annulled by litigious withdrawal. You will lose your investment and must reimburse the assignment price to the purchaser.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

  • Before assigning a litigious debt, have it certified by a notarial deed that the purchaser has not yet disputed the sale. Thus, litigious withdrawal cannot be exercised.
  • If you are a purchaser and receive a summons for rescission, react quickly. Monitor any assignments of debt in the legal publicity registers. You have a short period to exercise the withdrawal.
  • For sellers: only assign a debt after having obtained partial payment or a guarantee. It is better to negotiate a payment plan with the purchaser than to assign at a loss.
  • Consult a lawyer specialised in real estate before any assignment of debt. A 30-minute consultation can save you from a costly dispute.

The Court of Cassation had already admitted litigious withdrawal in matters of real estate debt (Civ. 1re, 12 May 1987, No. 85-14.123). But the originality of the 1993 decision is to specify that the withdrawal is possible even if the assignor was partially paid before the assignment. This solution was subsequently confirmed (Civ. 3e, 20 January 2010, No. 08-20.670).

The trend is therefore favourable to the debtor (the purchaser): litigious withdrawal is a potestative right (a right that the debtor can exercise unilaterally) that allows the assigned debt to be extinguished. However, the courts ensure that the assignor is not prejudiced: he must have received the assignment price, or at least part of it. In the future, the mechanism could be extended to assignments of future or conditional debts.

What you absolutely must remember

FAQ:

  1. Can I exercise litigious withdrawal if the seller has already been paid in full? No, withdrawal presupposes that the debt still exists. If the seller has been paid, the debt is extinguished.
  2. Does litigious withdrawal apply to any assignment of debt? Yes, as long as the debt is disputed (litigious) at the time of the assignment. It does not matter whether it is real estate or not.
  3. What is the deadline for exercising the withdrawal? The law does not set a precise deadline. But you must act before the assignee has obtained a final judgment. In practice, a few months.
  4. What happens if the assignee refuses reimbursement? You can apply to the court to have the validity of the withdrawal declared. The court will order reimbursement and substitution.

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 →

📌 Does this apply to your situation? Maître Cécile Zakine, French real estate lawyer, practises throughout France.
→ Prendre rendez-vous pour une consultation  |  → Browse all our legal articles

Questions fréquentes

Qu'est-ce que le retrait litigieux ?

C'est un mécanisme juridique (article 1699 du Code civil) qui permet à une personne poursuivie en justice de se substituer au cessionnaire d'une créance en lui remboursant le prix de cession, mettant ainsi fin au procès.

Puis-je exercer le retrait litigieux après avoir déjà payé le vendeur ?

Non, le retrait suppose que la créance existe encore. Si le vendeur a été désintéressé, la créance est éteinte et le retrait n'est plus possible.

Quel délai pour agir en retrait litigieux ?

Aucun délai légal fixe, mais il faut agir avant que le cessionnaire n'obtienne un jugement définitif. En pratique, quelques mois après la cession.

Le retrait litigieux fonctionne-t-il pour une créance immobilière ?

Oui, comme le montre cette décision de 1993 concernant la vente d'un terrain. Le mécanisme s'applique à toute créance contestée.

Que faire si le cessionnaire refuse le remboursement ?

Saisir le juge pour faire constater la validité du retrait. Le juge ordonnera le remboursement et la substitution dans le procès.

Informations juridiques

  • Numéro: 91-17.446
  • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
  • Date de décision: 16 juin 1993

Mots-clés

retrait litigieuxcession de créancerésolution de ventearticle 1699 Code civilimmobilier Reims

Cas d'usage pratiques

1

Owner selling a plot of land in Tinqueux

Mr. Durand sells a plot of land in Tinqueux for €150,000. The purchaser does not pay. Mr. Durand assigns his debt to a collection agency for €100,000. The purchaser exercises litigious withdrawal by reimbursing €100,000 to the agency. Mr. Durand loses €50,000.

Application pratique:

Before assigning a debt, check that the purchaser has not disputed the sale. Have the absence of dispute certified by a notarial deed. Otherwise, litigious withdrawal may cause you to lose part of the price.

2

Purchaser of a property in Reims

Mrs. Lefèvre buys a flat in Reims. The seller sues her for rescission for non-payment, then assigns his debt to a third party. Mrs. Lefèvre notifies a litigious withdrawal to the assignee, reimburses the assignment price, and the proceedings end. She keeps the property.

Application pratique:

If you are sued, monitor assignments of debt. As soon as you become aware of them, exercise litigious withdrawal. Consult a lawyer to comply with formalities.

3

Investor assignee of a debt (SCI)

An SCI buys a debt of €200,000 for €150,000. The initial purchaser exercises litigious withdrawal and reimburses €150,000 to the SCI. The SCI loses the potential gain of €50,000.

Application pratique:

Before buying a debt, check whether the purchaser has already disputed the sale. If so, the withdrawal is almost certain. Negotiate a price incorporating this risk or require a guarantee from the assignor.

Maître Cécile Zakine

À propos de l'auteur

Maître Cécile Zakine — Avocate au Barreau des Alpes-Maritimes, Docteur en Droit. Chaque article de ce magazine est rédigé à partir de l'analyse d'une décision de jurisprudence réelle, commentée et mise en perspective par les équipes de Maître Zakine.

Prendre rendez-vous →

Avertissement: Les analyses présentées sur ce site sont fournies à titre informatif uniquement et ne constituent pas des conseils juridiques personnalisés. Pour une consultation adaptée à votre situation, contactez un avocat.

Articles similaires en Droit-immobilier

Voir tout →

Servitude de passage et tierce opposition : protéger son droit d'accès en copropriété

Un copropriétaire peut-il s'opposer à la suppression d'une servitude de passage qui profite à son lot, même si le syndicat accepte la fin de l'enclave ? La Cour de cassation répond oui, reconnaissant un intérêt distinct pour agir en tierce opposition.

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Enclave et servitude : quand le droit du travail ne crée pas de passage forcé

La Cour de cassation rappelle que l'état d'enclave d'un fonds ne peut résulter des obligations réglementaires imposées aux entreprises en matière d'issues et dégagements. Ainsi, un propriétaire ne peut exiger un passage sur le fonds voisin au seul motif que son bâtiment doit respecter des normes de sécurité incendie.

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Lorsque, faute de convention écrite ou dans le silence, le préavis s'impose

Lorsque, faute de convention écrite ou dans le silence de cette convention, les parties à un contrat de transport public routier de marchandises n'ont pas stipulé une durée de préavis de rupture, cette durée est fixée par un contrat-type approuvé par décret pris en application de l'article L. 1432-4 du code des transports. Les dispositions de l'article L. 442-6, I, 5°, devenu L. 442-1, II, du code de commerce ne trouvent alors pas à s'appliquer. Il en va de même lorsque la convention écrite renvoie expressément à la clause du contrat-type fixant une telle durée. Lorsque les parties ont conclu un contrat écrit stipulant la durée du préavis de rupture, les dispositions de l'article L. 442-1, II, du code de commerce sont applicables. Dans cette hypothèse, l'auteur de la rupture qui a consenti à son partenaire un délai de préavis au moins égal à celui prévu au contrat-type dans sa version en vigueur à la date de la notification de la rupture, ne saurait voir sa responsabilité engagée sur le fondement de ce texte

23 juil. 2026Lire →

Explorez plus d'analyses juridiques en droit droit-immobilier

Tous les articles Droit-immobilier
★★★★★4.9/5 — Avis Google

Maître Zakine, Doctor of Law

Phone and video consultations available — Fast appointments

Book an appointment
First consultation 30 minutes — €45

🔒 Confidentiel • Sans engagement • Réponse rapide