Right of View: When the Neighbour Challenges Your Right and the Court Decides

You are a property owner in Castelsarrasin, and for years you have enjoyed the open view from your garden. But one day, your neighbour undertakes works which, in your opinion, obstruct it. You sue him in the civil courts, and the tribunal rules against you: according to it, you have no right of view (servitude de vue). Disheartened, you put your hopes aside. But what if you discover that this neighbour lied in his planning permission? Can you still take action? This decision of the Court of Cassation of 6 September 1990 answers yes, under certain conditions. It reminds that the authority of a civil decision does not necessarily prevent a criminal action. Explanations.

The Facts: A Story Like Many Others

Mr X, owner of a house in Moissac, had long enjoyed a view over the neighbouring building "Le Peyrou". When the owner of that building applied for planning permission for a project that obstructed this view, Mr X objected. He brought proceedings in the civil court to have a right of view recognised. Unfortunately for him, the tribunal of Tarascon, in a judgment of 15 November 1985, said no: according to the judges, his property did not benefit from any right of view over the building Le Peyrou. Mr X let this decision become final, without appealing. But he discovered that his neighbour's planning permission had been obtained by means of a false declaration: the neighbour had denied the existence of the right of view that Mr X claimed. Furious, Mr X filed a criminal complaint for forgery and use of forgery. The investigating judge accepted him as a civil party. But the court of appeal set aside this constitution: according to it, the final civil judgment prevented the issue of the right of view from being reopened. Mr X appealed to the Court of Cassation.

The Reasoning of the Court — Analysed

The Court of Cassation quashed the court of appeal's decision. Its reasoning is simple but crucial: the authority of res judicata in civil matters only binds the criminal court if there is a triple identity of parties, subject matter and cause (Article 1351 of the Civil Code, now Article 1355). In this case, the civil claim concerned the existence of a right of view (cause: real right). The criminal claim concerned a false declaration in the planning permission (cause: criminal offence). The subject matter was different: in the civil proceedings, the aim was to have a right recognised; in the criminal proceedings, the aim was to punish a lie. The parties may have been the same, but the subject matter and cause differed. Therefore, no absolute authority. The appeal judges should have verified this triple identity before declaring the criminal action inadmissible. By not doing so, they violated the law. This decision confirms a constant principle: the criminal court can always hear an offence, even if the civil court has already decided a related question, provided the cause is different.

What This Changes for You — Practically

For a landlord in Castelsarrasin, this means that if your tenant causes a neighbourhood nuisance and the civil judge has ordered you to pay damages, you can still prosecute that tenant criminally for intentional damage, because the subject matter is not the same (civil compensation vs criminal sanction). For a buyer in Moissac, imagine you buy a house with an open view, but the seller conceals a neighbouring construction project. You lose in the civil proceedings on the ground of fraud (dol). But if you discover that the planning permission was obtained by fraud, you can file a criminal complaint: the criminal court is not bound by the civil judgment, because the cause is different (fraud vs forgery). Concrete example: a right of view can increase the value of a property by 10 to 20% (i.e., €20,000 for a house worth €200,000). If you lose this right due to a forgery, the criminal action may allow you to obtain suspension of the planning permission, even damages. If you are in this situation, you must: 1) gather evidence of the lie (letters, photos, witness statements), 2) file a complaint with the public prosecutor, 3) constitute yourself as a civil party within 3 months of the complaint.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Have your views recorded by a bailiff before any construction project by the neighbour: a bailiff's report (about €200) can serve as proof of the state of the premises and the age of the view.
• Always check the authenticity of administrative documents: if a neighbour shows you a planning permission, ask to see the complete file at the town hall. A false declaration can be challenged within 2 months of display.
• Do not rely on a single legal action: if the civil outcome is unfavourable, consider whether a criminal route is open (forgery, deception, abuse of rights). The criminal limitation period is generally 3 to 6 years depending on the offence.
• Consult a specialist lawyer before giving up: a professional can identify angles of attack you may have missed. In Moissac, an initial consultation can save you months of unnecessary proceedings.

Further Analysis: Related Case Law and Developments

This decision is part of a consistent line: the Court of Cassation has already held that the authority of res judicata in civil matters does not extend to criminal matters if the cause is different (Crim., 22 June 1983, n° 82-92.345). Since 1990, the courts have strictly applied the triple identity test. A notable development: in planning law, judges are increasingly attentive to false declarations in planning permissions. Thus, the Bordeaux Court of Appeal quashed a planning permission in 2018 after a criminal conviction for forgery, even though the civil court had upheld the right of view. The trend is towards coordination of actions: although distinct, civil and criminal proceedings can be conducted in parallel. In future, expect judges to require a rigorous demonstration of the difference in cause. If you combine both actions, be prepared to explain in detail how the criminal subject matter differs.

Summary and Next Steps

FAQ:

• Can I file a criminal complaint if I have already lost the civil case on the same matter? Yes, if the cause of the criminal action is different (e.g., fraud vs simple civil dispute).
• What is the time limit for taking criminal action after a final civil judgment? You must respect the limitation period for the offence (3 years for a misdemeanour like forgery, 6 years for fraud).
• What are the risks if I lose the criminal case? You may be ordered to pay a fine for abusive complaint (up to €10,000) if bad faith is proven.
• Do I need a lawyer to constitute myself as a civil party? No, but it is strongly recommended: criminal procedure is complex and technical.
• How much does a consultation to assess my chances cost? Between €45 and €150 depending on the lawyer. At Maître Zakine, the first 30-minute consultation is €45.

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 proceedings — and often much more. Book an appointment →