In the case, a buyer of a house with a surface area of 153 m2, purchased for €300,000, lost a long lawsuit against his notaire after discovering, a month after the signing of the sale and purchase contract (compromis de vente), that the property was located in an area zoned for agricultural use.
This zoning classification, he claimed, prevented him from extending his house or constructing new buildings, as he had planned. In practice, an extension to an existing residence in an agricultural area is permitted development.
A month later, following the standard search enquiries carried out by the notaire, the buyer was notified of the planning constraint.
The buyer, believing that the property had lost its value, refused to finalise the purchase, thereby forfeiting his 10% deposit (€30,000).
The buyer then sued his notaire, accusing him of not having informed him of this restriction.
When the case was heard in the local tribunal, the judge ruled in his favour, stating that the notaire had failed in his duty to advise.
However, in 2023, the Orléans Court of Appeal reversed this judgment: according to the court, the notaire is not required to systematically request a planning certificate before signing a compromis de vente.
Above all, the court pointed out that the buyer did not mention, at the time of signing, his intention to build or extend the property. If he had done so, he should have requested a conditional clause be included in the agreement that completion was subject to new construction being permitted.
The Court of Appeal recalled that the classification as an agricultural zone did not prevent the house from being used as a dwelling.
The buyer appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation), who confirmed the decision of the lower court: the notaire had not committed a fault, and the buyer had not sufficiently specified his plans.
The court also stated that: “Finally,.. the purchaser does not demonstrate that the classification of the parcel in a agricultural zone renders the property unfit for its purpose, nor that this classification…. limits its constructability, since such a classification does not prohibit any construction and extensions are possible.” Such a statement does suggest that the court considered that the buyer may well have been looking for a reason to be released from the contract.
Interpretation of the ruling does, however, need to be nuanced, as notaires do have a legal obligation of advice, and there have been many cases in the courts where the failure to give advice has led to a notaire being found culpable. In this case, what appears to have made the difference is that the buyer did not indicate that he was proposing to build on the land.
Tom Easdown, MD and architect at French Plans, a planning and architectural service in France, comments that: “It is always advisable to include a conditional clause in a sale and purchase contract if you want to develop a property in agricultural or natural zones.”
Related Reading:
