Violates the provisions of the law of
Droit Immobilier

Violates the provisions of the law of

📅 Décision du 23 May 1991⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 2 vues📖 2 min de lecture

Violates the provisions of the law of 1 June 1924, applicable in the departments of Bas-Rhin, Haut-Rhin and Moselle, the judgment which held that the 6-month period imposed by Article 42 of the said law to execute a deed transferring immovable property in authentic form may be contractually reduced and that the absence of a notarial deed within the prescribed period entails the lapse of the transfer of ownership by application of the principle of consensualism, whereas the sanction provided for by the text is only triggered by the exceeding of the legally fixed period.

Reference decision: cc • No. 89-16.810 • 1991-05-23 • Consult the decision →

This decision provides important insight into your real estate law. Here is what it means for you.

The situation

Violates the provisions of the law of 1 June 1924, applicable in the departments of Bas-Rhin, Haut-Rhin and Moselle, the judgment which held that the 6-month period imposed by Article 42 of the said law to execute a deed transferring immovable property in authentic form may be contractually reduced and that the absence of a notarial deed within the prescribed period entails the lapse of the transfer of ownership by application of the principle of consensualism, whereas the sanction provided for by the text is only triggered by the exceeding of the legally fixed period.

What the law says

This decision confirms the fundamental principles of property law.

Key takeaways

  • Scrupulously comply with the legal time limits for appeals
  • Keep all your supporting documents (title deeds, deeds, 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: 89-16.810
  • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
  • Date de décision: 23 mai 1991

Mots-clés

droit immobilierjurisprudenceimmobilier

Cas d'usage pratiques

1

First-time buyer worried about missed deed deadline

Sophie recently agreed to buy a €210,000 flat in Strasbourg, with the preliminary contract stating that the final deed must be signed within 3 months to avoid the sale lapsing. Due to a notary backlog, the 3-month deadline passes without the deed being signed, and Sophie fears she will lose the property and her deposit.

Application pratique:

Under the law applicable in Alsace-Moselle, a sale of land only lapses if the authentic deed is not signed within the legally fixed 6-month period (Article 42 of the Law of 1 June 1924). Contractual clauses reducing this period are invalid. Sophie should calmly assure the seller that the sale remains valid despite the missed 3-month deadline, and proceed to signing at the earliest opportunity. If the seller attempts to cancel, she can rely on this decision to enforce the sale.

2

Landlord cannot shorten deed deadline for sale

Jean, a landlord in Colmar, sold a rental property for €350,000. The preliminary contract included a clause reducing the deadline for the authentic deed to 4 months, stating that failure would nullify the sale. The buyer encountered financing delays and the 4-month deadline passed; Jean now wants to reclaim the property and resell at a higher price.

Application pratique:

The Court of Cassation ruled that the 6-month period for executing the authentic deed under the 1924 local law cannot be contractually reduced. The sanction of lapse only applies after the full 6 months. Jean cannot declare the sale void based on the contractual 4-month deadline. He must honour the sale and wait for the deed to be signed within the legal period, or only cancel after 6 months if still not executed. He should instruct his notary to proceed with the deed despite the delay.

3

Co-owner uses deadline trick to halt sale

In a building in Metz, two siblings co-own a flat worth €180,000. When one sibling, Marc, decides to sell his share to a third party, the co-ownership agreement gives the other sibling a right of first refusal. Marc's preliminary contract with a buyer includes a 2-month deadline for the deed, hoping the sibling will miss it and lose the right to purchase. The sibling exercises the right but needs more time to arrange funds.

Application pratique:

The law of 1 June 1924, as interpreted by this decision, makes clear that any contractual reduction of the 6-month period is invalid. Marc cannot artificially shorten the time frame to deprive his co-owner sibling of the pre-emption right. The sibling has the full 6-month legal period to complete the purchase after exercising the right. He should formally notify Marc that he relies on the legal deadline and proceed with financing. If Marc tries to sell to the third party before 6 months, the sibling can challenge the sale in court.

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.

Maître Zakine, Doctor of Law

Phone and video consultations available — Fast appointments

Book an appointment
First consultation 30 minutes — €45