Aller au contenu principal
Failure to implement a
Droit-immobilier

Failure to implement a

📅 Decision of 16 December 2010🔄 Updated on 4 October 2026⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 11 views📖 2 min read

The failure to implement a clause in a contract establishing a mandatory conciliation procedure as a prerequisite to bringing the matter before a judge constitutes a ground of inadmissibility that can be remedied during the proceedings. Consequently, Article 126 of the Code of Civil Procedure is violated when the Court of Appeal upholds such a ground of inadmissibility, whereas at the date of its decision, the cause of inadmissibility had ceased to exist, as the claimants had implemented the conciliation procedure in the form required by the preliminary sale agreement and, after noting its failure, had renewed their claims before the judge.

Reference decision: cc • No. 09-71.575 • 2010-12-16 • View decision →

This decision provides important clarification on your property law. Here is what it changes for you.

The situation

The failure to implement a clause in a contract establishing a mandatory conciliation procedure as a prerequisite to bringing the matter before a judge constitutes a ground of inadmissibility that can be remedied during the proceedings. Consequently, Article 126 of the Code of Civil Procedure is violated when the Court of Appeal upholds such a ground of inadmissibility, whereas at the date of its decision, the cause of inadmissibility had ceased to exist, as the claimants had implemented the conciliation procedure in the form required by the preliminary sale agreement and, after noting its failure, had renewed their claims before the judge.

What the law says

This decision confirms the fundamental principles of property law.

Key points to remember

  • Strictly observe the legal time limits for appeals
  • Keep all your supporting documents (titles, deeds, correspondence)
  • Anticipate: preventive advice is always cheaper than litigation

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

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.
→ Avocat droit du travail  |  → Browse all our legal articles

Legal information

  • Number: 09-71.575
  • Court: Cour de cassation
  • Decision of: 16 December 2010

Keywords

droit immobilierjurisprudenceimmobilier

Practical use cases

1

First-time buyer's pre-sale conciliation delay

A first-time buyer in Lyon signs a preliminary sale agreement for a €250,000 apartment, which includes a mandatory conciliation step before any court action. The buyer discovers a hidden defect and sues the seller directly, ignoring the conciliation clause.

Practical application:

The seller can initially raise the lack of conciliation as a ground of inadmissibility. However, under this case law, the buyer can remedy this by starting conciliation proceedings while the lawsuit is pending. If conciliation fails, the buyer can then return to court, and the judge must accept the case. The buyer should promptly initiate conciliation and inform the court, avoiding dismissal.

2

Landlord's lease dispute conciliation clause

A landlord in Paris includes a mandatory mediation clause in a residential lease before any eviction proceedings. The tenant stops paying rent, and the landlord files for eviction without attempting mediation.

Practical application:

The tenant may object that the landlord failed to comply with the mediation clause. However, the landlord can now start mediation after filing the lawsuit. If mediation fails, the landlord can continue the eviction case. The landlord should immediately arrange mediation and notify the court to prevent dismissal. This avoids unnecessary delays.

3

Co-owners' building dispute conciliation

Two co-owners in a condominium in Nice disagree over the allocation of parking spaces, as per the co-ownership rules which require conciliation before litigation. One co-owner sues the other without conciliation.

Practical application:

The defendant can raise the lack of conciliation, but the plaintiff can cure this by engaging in conciliation during the proceedings. Once conciliation fails, the plaintiff can return to court, and the judge must rule on the merits. The plaintiff should promptly request conciliation and provide proof to the court, ensuring the case proceeds.

Maître Cécile Zakine

About the author

Maître Cécile Zakine — Lawyer at the Alpes-Maritimes Bar, Doctor of Law. Every article in this magazine is based on the analysis of a real court decision, commented and put into perspective by Maître Zakine’s team.

Book an appointment →

Disclaimer: The analysis presented on this site is for informational purposes only and does not constitute personalised legal advice. For advice tailored to your situation, contact a qualified lawyer.

★★★★★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