The Competitive Tendering Obligation

Practical application:

The Cass. 12-26.395 ruling confirms that the competitive tendering obligation (Article 21 of the 1965 law) is satisfied simply by requesting multiple quotes. Actually awarding the contract is a separate decision. Here, Sophie should immediately request proof that at least two other quotes were sought. If the syndic cannot produce them, she can argue before the general meeting or a court that the mandatory tender process was not respected, potentially invalidating the contract.

Practical application:

The ruling clarifies that the mere request for several quotes meets the legal duty. Marc should formally demand the syndic’s records (quote requests, responses, and reasons for selection). If only one quote was actually sought, the obligation is breached. Marc can then press for a vote at the next AGM to re-tender or, if necessary, seek judicial annulment of the contract and recovery of overpaid charges.

Practical application:

Under the Cass. 12-26.395 decision, the syndic must demonstrate that several quotes were requested, even if not actually received. As a buyer, Amélie should ask the seller or the syndic for proof of the tender process. If none exists, she can negotiate the purchase price to reflect the risk of future legal challenges, or insist the syndic undertakes a proper market test before she completes. This protects her from inheriting a contract that may be vulnerable to cancellation by other co-owners.