Aller au contenu principal
A criminal statute extending an offence to a new category of defendants may not apply to acts committed prior to its entry into force.
Droit Immobilier

A criminal statute extending an offence to a new category of defendants may not apply to acts committed prior to its entry into force.

📅 Décision du 19 June 2007⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 16 vues📖 2 min de lecture

A criminal statute extending an offence to a new category of defendants may not apply to acts committed prior to its entry into force. The Court of Appeal misapplied this principle by convicting a company for acts of deception and misleading advertising committed before the entry into force of both the Law of 12 June 2001, which extended the possibility of attributing these two offences to legal persons, and the Law of 9 March 2004, which abolished the principle of speciality of criminal liability of legal persons.

Reference decision: cc • No. 06-85.490 • 2007-06-19 • Consult the decision →

This decision sheds important light on your real estate rights. Here is what it changes for you.

The situation

A criminal statute extending an offence to a new category of defendants may not apply to acts committed prior to its entry into force. The Court of Appeal misapplied this principle by convicting a company for acts of deception and misleading advertising committed before the entry into force of both the Law of 12 June 2001, which extended the possibility of attributing these two offences to legal persons, and the Law of 9 March 2004, which abolished the principle of speciality of criminal liability of legal persons.

What the law says

This decision confirms the fundamental principles of property law.

Key points

  • Strictly observe the statutory deadlines for appeals
  • Keep all your supporting documents (title deeds, agreements, correspondence)
  • Anticipate: preventive advice always costs less than litigation

For an analysis of your situation: 30-minute consultation at €45 with Maître Zakine.

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

Informations juridiques

  • Numéro: 06-85.490
  • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
  • Date de décision: 19 juin 2007

Mots-clés

droit immobilierjurisprudenceimmobilier

Cas d'usage pratiques

1

Company landlord accused of past misleading advert

In 2000, a property investment company (SCI) in Nice advertised a furnished studio with an exaggerated energy performance rating. The tenant, who signed the lease in 2001, now seeks to press criminal charges for deceptive commercial practices after discovering the energy rating was falsified.

Application pratique:

The criminal liability of legal persons for misleading advertising was only introduced by the Law of 12 June 2001. As the advertisement was published before this date, the company cannot be convicted for acts committed prior to the law's entry into force. The landlord should raise this non-retroactivity defence and ensure all future property listings comply with current regulations. Keep a dated copy of the original advertisement as evidence of the timeline.

2

First-time buyer deceived by off-plan developer

In 2002, a young couple from Lyon bought an off-plan apartment, relying on the developer's glossy brochure that promised high-spec finishes and a landscaped garden. Upon delivery in 2004, the finishes were substandard and the garden was replaced by a car park. The buyer wishes to file a criminal complaint for deception against the developer (a limited company).

Application pratique:

The Law of 9 March 2004 abolished the principle of speciality of criminal liability of legal persons, making companies broadly liable for offences like deception. However, the misleading brochure was distributed in 2002, before this law came into force. The developer cannot be retroactively charged under the expanded rules. The buyers should instead pursue a civil claim for breach of contract or latent defects, as contractual remedies are not bound by this criminal non-retroactivity principle.

3

Co-owners challenge syndic's past financial deception

A group of co-owners in a Paris building suspect that in 2003 the property management company (syndic) submitted inflated maintenance invoices and concealed actual costs, amounting to a €30,000 overcharge. They intend to file a criminal complaint for deception against the company.

Application pratique:

At the time of the acts in 2003, the criminal liability of legal persons for deception was limited by the speciality principle; it only applied if expressly stipulated by law. The 2004 law abolished this restriction but cannot be applied retroactively. Thus, the syndic company likely cannot be prosecuted for these pre-2004 actions. The co-owners should instead demand a full financial audit and initiate civil proceedings to recover the overcharged sums, relying on breach of fiduciary duty.

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.

★★★★★4.9/5 — Google Reviews

Does this affect you?

Consult Maître Zakine — lawyer, Doctor of Law. Fast, clear answer.

Book a consultation →

🔒 Confidential · No obligation

📬 Get legal updates

One legal analysis per week, straight to your inbox. Free, no spam.

🔒 1-click unsubscribe · GDPR compliant

★★★★★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