You live abroad, you hold shares in a French SAS (société par actions simplifiée, the simplified joint-stock company that foreign founders use most often), and you want to sell. Perhaps a co-founder offers to buy you out, perhaps an outside investor knocks on the door, or perhaps the relationship between shareholders has broken down and the bylaws force one of you to leave. The questions you ask from another country are concrete: can I sell freely or does someone have to approve the buyer, how is the price fixed when the parties disagree, how long can the company stall, and what papers must be signed so the sale is final and registered? This guide answers in the order a French business lawyer handles the file. French company law starts from freedom: SAS shares are in principle freely transferable. But almost every SAS tempers that freedom with bespoke bylaw clauses — prior approval of the buyer (agrément), lock-up periods (inaliénabilité), forced-sale clauses (exclusion), change-of-control clauses, and rights of first refusal (préemption). Each clause has its own majority rules, its own deadlines, and its own sanction, and a sale closed in breach of the bylaws is void. The price, when the company buys back or imposes the transfer, is either agreed or fixed by an independent expert under a procedure the Court of Cassation (Cour de cassation, France’s highest civil court) supervises closely. Every step can be handled from abroad through notifications, proxies and a French representative, but the paperwork must be exact: the transfer order (ordre de mouvement), the share-movement register (registre des mouvements de titres), the registration duty, and the company books. This guide explains each French term as it appears. Readers choosing their vehicle will pair it with our companion guide on how a foreign founder chooses between SAS, SARL and branch, and founders considering a full exit rather than a single transfer should compare with the route described in closing a French company from abroad.
I. Can you sell your SAS shares freely when you live abroad?
A. When does your buyer need approval, and when are your shares locked up?
Open your bylaws (statuts) before promising anything to a buyer, because in a SAS almost everything about transfers is contractual. Unlike the SARL, where the statute imposes an approval procedure by default, the SAS statute says only that the bylaws may impose one: « Les statuts peuvent soumettre toute cession d’actions à l’agrément préalable de la société. » (Article L227-14 of the Commercial Code). If your bylaws contain no approval clause, you sell to whomever you wish and neither the company nor your co-shareholders can block the buyer. If they do contain one, read it line by line from abroad before signing a preliminary agreement: which transfers does it cover, sales only or also gifts, contributions and transfers on death, who decides, the president, the shareholders collectively or a committee, by which majority, and within which period? A well-drafted clause sets a response deadline, typically two to three months, and provides that silence counts as approval; a poorly drafted one says nothing about delay, and that silence in the drafting becomes the first source of litigation. Notify the planned sale exactly as the clause requires, by the stipulated channel, with the buyer’s identity, the number of shares and the price, and keep proof of receipt, because the clock only runs from a compliant notification. Where the bylaws require a collective decision, a shareholder living abroad votes by videoconference or written consultation if the bylaws allow it, or by proxy (pouvoir) given to a trusted person in France; check the bylaw provisions on remote participation before the meeting is convened so your vote cannot be challenged afterwards.
Two neighbouring clauses can freeze your exit completely, and both must be checked before you announce a sale. First, the lock-up clause (clause d’inaliénabilité): « Les statuts de la société peuvent prévoir l’inaliénabilité des actions pour une durée n’excédant pas dix ans. » (Article L227-13 of the Commercial Code). During the lock-up, you cannot sell at all, even to a co-shareholder, unless every shareholder unanimously agrees to lift it. Lock-ups are common after a fundraising or between founders who want to prevent an early walkout, and they routinely run five to ten years. If you joined the SAS less than ten years ago and the bylaws mention inalienability, ask your lawyer to compute the exact expiry date before negotiating: a sale signed during the lock-up is void, and the ten-year ceiling is absolute. Second, the change-of-control clause matters when the seller is itself a company: « Les statuts peuvent prévoir que la société associée dont le contrôle est modifié au sens de l’article L. 233-3 doit, dès cette modification, en informer la société par actions simplifiée. Celle-ci peut décider, dans les conditions fixées par les statuts, de suspendre l’exercice des droits non pécuniaires de cet associé et de l’exclure. » (Article L227-17 of the Commercial Code). In plain terms, if a foreign holding company that holds SAS shares is itself sold or restructured, the SAS can suspend that shareholder’s voting rights and force it out. Foreign groups that hold French subsidiaries through intermediate vehicles discover this clause at the worst moment, during the group’s own sale, so map the chain of control before the group-level deal closes and notify the SAS the day the upstream change takes effect, exactly as the clause demands.
The practical lesson for a seller living abroad is sequencing. First, pull the current bylaws and every shareholders’ agreement (pacte d’associés), because approval, pre-emption and lock-up rules often sit in the private agreement rather than the bylaws, and the agreement may add notice periods and matching rights the bylaws do not mention. Second, identify every clause that touches your planned sale: approval, lock-up, pre-emption, joint-exit (drag-along) and joint-entry (tag-along) rights. Third, calendar the deadlines backwards from the date you promised the buyer, allowing for postal and translation time if you sign from another country. Fourth, send the notification in the exact required form and track the response period day by day. A seller who notifies properly and watches the clock converts a discretionary approval into a deemed approval when the period expires; a seller who notifies loosely hands the company a reason to claim it was never seized and to restart the clock.
B. What happens if you ignore the bylaws, and how does the SARL differ?
The sanction for bypassing the bylaws is brutal and automatic: « Toute cession effectuée en violation des clauses statutaires est nulle. » (Article L227-15 of the Commercial Code). Nullity (nullité) means the sale is treated as never having existed: the buyer never became a shareholder, the seller still owns the shares, votes cast by the supposed buyer can be annulled, and dividends paid to the wrong person must be repaid. Any interested party can invoke it, the company, a co-shareholder, and in some configurations the seller itself, and the buyer who paid the price must then chase restitution through a separate claim while the shares sit in legal limbo. The nullity action is subject to the general limitation rules, so a defective sale can poison the company’s shareholder base for years: every later resolution adopted with the wrong voter on the register carries a challenge risk. From abroad, the prevention costs far less than the cure: a one-page compliance check of the clauses before signing, a compliant notification, and a written approval or a documented expiry of the response period. Never accept a seller’s assurance that the bylaws are a formality; ask for the bylaws, read the transfer clauses, and make your offer conditional (condition suspensive) on obtaining the approval or on confirmation that no clause applies.
Founders who hesitate between vehicles should understand that the SARL (société à responsabilité limitée, the limited-liability company with parts sociales rather than shares) plays by opposite defaults: transfers to outsiders always need approval unless the bylaws say otherwise. The statute provides: « Les parts sociales ne peuvent être cédées à des tiers étrangers à la société qu’avec le consentement de la majorité des associés représentant au moins la moitié des parts sociales, à moins que les statuts prévoient une majorité plus forte. » (Article L223-14 of the Commercial Code). The procedure is also codified: the planned sale is notified to the company and to each shareholder, and « Si la société n’a pas fait connaître sa décision dans le délai de trois mois à compter de la dernière des notifications prévues au présent alinéa, le consentement à la cession est réputé acquis. » (same article). If approval is refused, the statute organises a buyback: the remaining shareholders must acquire the shares or have them acquired, or the company must reduce its capital, within three months, failing which the seller may proceed with the original buyer. That safety net does not exist by default in a SAS; it exists only if your bylaws wrote one. This is why the SAS rewards careful drafting and punishes neglect: total freedom if the bylaws are silent, total blockage if a clause was inserted and forgotten.
One more majority rule decides whether the clauses themselves can be changed to unblock a sale. Inalienability and change-of-control clauses can only be adopted or amended unanimously: « Les clauses statutaires visées aux articles L. 227-13 et L. 227-17 ne peuvent être adoptées ou modifiées qu’à l’unanimité des associés. Les clauses statutaires mentionnées aux articles L. 227-14 et L. 227-16 ne peuvent être adoptées ou modifiées que par une décision prise collectivement par les associés dans les conditions et formes prévues par les statuts. » (Article L227-19 of the Commercial Code). In practice, a locked-in shareholder cannot force the others to remove a lock-up or an approval clause; a single co-shareholder’s refusal preserves the clause. Conversely, introducing a new approval clause against a shareholder who bought when transfers were free requires that shareholder’s own consent in the collective decision. From abroad, attend that vote carefully: a written consultation answered late, or a videoconference connection that drops during the vote, can become the ground for annulling the amendment, and with it every sale it was meant to allow or prevent.
II. At what price will your shares be bought back, and what if the buyer stalls?
A. How is the price fixed when approval is refused or a shareholder is forced out?
Price is where friendly exits turn adversarial, and the SAS statute gives a clear ladder: agreement first, expert second. The rule provides: « Si les statuts ne précisent pas les modalités du prix de cession des actions lorsque la société met en oeuvre une clause introduite en application des articles L. 227-14 , L. 227-16 et L. 227-17 , ce prix est fixé par accord entre les parties ou, à défaut, déterminé dans les conditions prévues à l’article 1843-4 du code civil. Lorsque les actions sont rachetées par la société, celle-ci est tenue de les céder dans un délai de six mois ou de les annuler. » (Article L227-18 of the Commercial Code). Three consequences follow. First, check whether the bylaws or the shareholders’ agreement already fix a formula, a multiple of revenue or EBITDA (excédent brut d’exploitation), a net-asset floor, a discount for minority holdings, because that formula displaces the expert if it produces a determinable price. Second, if no formula exists or the parties cannot agree, either side can ask a judge to appoint the expert, and the sale cannot be blocked simply by refusing to discuss price. Third, when the company itself buys back, the six-month deadline to resell or cancel the shares forces the endgame: the company cannot sit on your shares indefinitely while paying you nothing.
The expert procedure of Article 1843-4 of the Civil Code is the workhorse of French shareholder exits, and a seller abroad should understand its mechanics before invoking it. The statute states that « la valeur de ces droits est déterminée, en cas de contestation, par un expert désigné, soit par les parties, soit à défaut d’accord entre elles, par jugement du président du tribunal judiciaire ou du tribunal de commerce compétent, statuant selon la procédure accélérée au fond et sans recours possible. » (Article 1843-4 of the Civil Code), and that « L’expert ainsi désigné est tenu d’appliquer, lorsqu’elles existent, les règles et modalités de détermination de la valeur prévues par les statuts de la société ou par toute convention liant les parties. » (same article). Concretely, you petition the president of the competent court, in an accelerated procedure (procédure accélérée au fond) with no appeal against the appointment itself, the judge names an independent valuer, usually a chartered accountant or valuation firm, the expert applies the contractual formula where one exists, and the resulting value binds the parties. The reference date for the valuation is normally the date closest to the transfer, often the date of the decision that triggered the buyback, and recent decisions confirm that courts fix that date precisely: in a March 2026 Bordeaux case, after shareholders voted the exclusion of a company holding 18,193 shares in a SAS holding, the president of the commercial court appointed a judicial expert under Article 1843-4 to value those shares exactly at the date of the exclusion meeting (Bordeaux commercial court, accelerated procedure, 24 March 2026, RG 2026F00284). Calendar that date from abroad, because every month of delay between the trigger event and the valuation date moves the figures.
The Court of Cassation has refined the division of labour between the expert and the judge in a published ruling every adviser cites. It holds: « Il résulte de l’article 1843-4, II, du code civil que si l’expert est tenu d’appliquer, lorsqu’elles existent, les règles et modalités de détermination de la valeur des droits sociaux prévues par toute convention liant les parties, il incombe au juge d’interpréter, s’il y a lieu, la commune intention des parties à la convention. » (Court of Cassation, commercial chamber, 17 January 2024, No 22-15.897, published in the Bulletin), adding: « En application de ces principes, l’expert peut, afin de ne pas retarder le cours de ses opérations, retenir différentes évaluations correspondant aux interprétations de la convention respectivement revendiquées par les parties, à charge pour le juge, après avoir procédé à la recherche nécessaire de la commune intention des parties, d’appliquer l’évaluation correspondante, laquelle s’impose alors à lui. » (same decision). For a seller abroad, the message is operational: if the price formula in the agreement is ambiguous, do not ask the expert to choose your interpretation; ask the expert to value both readings, then argue the common intention before the judge. That two-track approach avoids restarting the whole expertise when the judge disagrees with a single-figure report, and it regularly saves a year of procedure.
Forced-sale clauses deserve a separate warning, because they let the majority push a shareholder out. The statute allows the bylaws to provide that « un associé peut être tenu de céder ses actions », and that « Ils peuvent également prévoir la suspension des droits non pécuniaires de cet associé tant que celui-ci n’a pas procédé à cette cession. » (Article L227-16 of the Commercial Code). Exclusion clauses typically list trigger events, serious breach of the shareholders’ agreement, competing activity, criminal conviction affecting the company’s reputation, prolonged deadlock, and they must describe the procedure: notice of the grounds, time to respond, which body votes, whether the targeted shareholder votes on its own fate, and the price mechanism. A clause that lets the majority exclude without stating grounds, without a hearing and at a price it sets alone will be attacked before the courts, and judges review the loyalty of the process. If you receive an exclusion notice while abroad, answer in writing within the stated period, contest imprecise grounds immediately, vote where the bylaws let you, and from day one propose the expert route on price so the majority cannot impose a symbolic euro. If you are the majority activating the clause, mirror the procedure to the letter, convene properly, document the grounds with exhibits, exclude the targeted shareholder from the vote only where the bylaws so provide, and notify the decision with the buyback offer; the Bordeaux 2026 case shows the courts expect exactly that sequence, exclusion vote first, notified offer second, expert petition third.
B. How do you sign, register and defend the sale from abroad, including in Paris?
Once approval is obtained or deemed, the sale itself follows a short chain of papers, and each link can be prepared from another country. First, the sale agreement (acte de cession): names, number and class of shares, price, payment terms, representations about ownership and absence of pledges (nantissement), and any seller’s asset-and-liability guarantee (garantie d’actif et de passif) where the buyer wants protection against hidden company debts. Sign electronically with a qualified signature or before a French lawyer holding powers of attorney; if the seller is a foreign company, attach an apostilled (apostille) extract of its home register with a sworn translation (traduction assermentée) so the French file proves the signatory’s authority. Second, the transfer order: SAS shares are registered securities, and ownership passes by entry in the company’s books, through a signed ordre de mouvement recorded in the registre des mouvements de titres kept at the registered office. No entry, no transfer against the company: a buyer who paid but was never registered cannot vote and cannot receive dividends. Third, the tax registration: share sales are filed with the tax office (service des impôts) within one month, and « Les cessions de droits sociaux sont soumises à un droit d’enregistrement » at 0.1 percent of the price for company shares (Article 726 of the General Tax Code), normally paid by the buyer unless the agreement shifts it. Fourth, update the company’s shareholder records and, where the bylaws require it, notify the president so new certificates (attestations de propriété) issue. The share register never goes to the public trade register, which is why buyers of SAS shares must verify the register itself rather than relying on the Kbis (Kbis, the official company identity extract issued by the greffe, the court clerk office): the Kbis shows directors and capital, not who owns the shares.
Pre-emption rights (droits de préemption) add a parallel queue of buyers that a foreign seller must serve before selling outside. Many SAS bylaws and agreements give existing shareholders priority to buy at the notified price within a fixed window, often thirty to sixty days. The Court of Cassation treats these bespoke clauses literally and enforces them as written: in a 2019 ruling on a SAS whose bylaws reserved priority for employee shareholders assessed at the notification date, the Court upheld the appeal court’s reading, reached through sovereign interpretation of the ambiguous clause without distortion, that the right belonged to employees below a holding threshold whenever the workforce held less than a quarter of the capital when the sales were notified (Court of Cassation, commercial chamber, 18 September 2019, No 17-18.143, rejection). Serve every pre-emption beneficiary individually at the notification-date addresses in the register, state the price and terms identically to all, and wait out the full window; a sale closed during the window or at a lower price than notified reopens the nullity risk of Article L227-15. Where several beneficiaries pre-empt more shares than offered, the bylaws usually prorate; where none pre-empts, keep the written waivers or the proof of lapsed deadlines, because the outside buyer will ask for them before paying.
For companies seated in Paris and the Île-de-France region, three local specifics change the daily handling. First, jurisdiction: price-expert petitions and transfer disputes for Paris-seated companies go to the Paris commercial court, since 2025 renamed in major cities the tribunal des activités économiques, or to the Paris judicial court (tribunal judiciaire de Paris) depending on the claim, and Paris counsel can file and plead while the client follows by video link; allow for hearing delays that run longer in Paris than in smaller registries. Second, formalities: the Paris greffe and the single company counter (guichet unique run by the INPI, the national industrial-property and companies office) handle filings tied to capital changes that sometimes accompany a buyback, and Paris examiners reject incomplete foreign documents fast, so attach the apostille and sworn translation at first filing rather than after a rejection. Third, enforcement: if the buyer refuses to pay the price after registration, the seller enforces through a commissaire de justice (the enforcement officer formerly called huissier de justice) competent in the Paris area, and securities and bank accounts are seized where they sit, which for Paris companies and banks usually means within the region. None of this requires relocating: powers of attorney, remote signatures and a Paris-based lawyer cover notifications, filings, hearings and service, but the timeline must absorb international mailing and legalisation steps that a Paris-based seller never faces.
When the other side stalls, French law offers a graduated escalation that works from abroad. A refused approval without a buyback offer within the bylaw period calls for a formal notice (mise en demeure) setting a final deadline and announcing the expert petition; silence then becomes evidence of obstruction rather than negotiation. A disputed price goes to the Article 1843-4 expert, whose appointment neither party can appeal, which is precisely why obstruction fails: the procedure advances without the validating party’s cooperation. A buyer who signed and will not pay faces a payment order or an emergency hearing, with seizure of accounts through the commissaire de justice once a title is obtained. A company that never registers a completed transfer faces a court order to register under penalty (astreinte, a daily fine for delay) plus damages for lost dividends and votes. And a shareholder excluded without grounds or without procedure challenges the exclusion itself while offering to sell at the expert’s price, keeping both tracks alive. At every stage, write rather than call: from another time zone, only dated written proof counts, and French commercial judges decide on exhibits, not recollections of phone calls.
Conclusion
Selling SAS shares from abroad is a paper chain where each link has a legal name: check the lock-up and approval clauses before promising anything, notify the planned sale exactly as the bylaws require, serve every pre-emption right at the same price, agree the price or send it to the Article 1843-4 expert without delay, sign the sale, register the movement in the company’s books, file the 0.1 percent registration duty within the month, and keep the written proof of every step. Respect the majority that adopts and amends transfer clauses, because a sale closed against the bylaws is void and poisons every later vote. Price disputes are not dead ends: the expert values, the judge interprets the agreement, and the 2024 published ruling tells your adviser to run both valuations at once when the formula is ambiguous. Handled in that order, through notifications, proxies and a French representative, distance changes nothing about the outcome: the shares pass, the price is paid, and the register tells the same story to the company, the tax office and the next buyer.