Aller au contenu principal
Violates Articles 1147 and 1315 of the
Droit Immobilier

Violates Articles 1147 and 1315 of the

📅 Decision of 10 January 2001🔄 Updated on 4 October 2026⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 3 views📖 2 min read

Violates Articles 1147 and 1315 of the Civil Code, by reversing the burden of proof, a Court of Appeal which allows the project owner's claim for repair of defects including value added tax (VAT) on the ground that the builders do not prove that the owner meets the conditions to recover VAT, whereas the architects argued that the teaching activity carried on by the project owner was not exempt from payment of VAT and that he had the possibility of recovering it by invoicing this tax to his clients.

Reference decision: cc • N° 99-13.103 • 2001-01-10 • View the decision →

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

The situation

Violates Articles 1147 and 1315 of the Civil Code, by reversing the burden of proof, a Court of Appeal which allows the project owner's claim for repair of defects including value added tax (VAT) on the ground that the builders do not prove that the owner meets the conditions to recover VAT, whereas the architects argued that the teaching activity carried on by the project owner was not exempt from payment of VAT and that he had the possibility of recovering it by invoicing this tax to his clients.

What the law says

This decision confirms the fundamental principles of property law.

Key points to remember

  • Strictly observe the statutory time limits for legal action.
  • Keep all your supporting documents (title deeds, instruments, 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

Legal information

  • Number: 99-13.103
  • Court: Cour de cassation
  • Decision of: 10 January 2001

Keywords

droit immobilierjurisprudenceimmobilier
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