A two-bedroom flat in the 18th arrondissement of Paris is advertised at a starting price forty per cent below the street average. The sale takes place not in an estate agent’s window but in a courtroom of the Paris judicial court, the bidding lasts minutes, and the buyer must pay the full price within two months with no loan condition and no cooling-off period. Ten days after the hammer falls, a stranger can still take the flat away by offering one-tenth more. This is the vente sur saisie immobilière (forced sale following a seizure of real property), the French judicial auction, and it rewards buyers who prepare like lawyers rather than bargain-hunters who improvise.

Foreign buyers are not excluded: no nationality condition bars you from bidding, and the courts regularly handle files in which the seized owners themselves live abroad. In a 2022 ruling of the Second Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, the seized debtors were domiciled in Ireland while their French property went through seizure, overbidding, default, and resale in Béziers. That decision, studied below, is a concentrated lesson in everything that can go wrong after the auction. This guide explains the procedure in the order a buyer experiences it: how the sale is organised and how to bid, the ten-day overbidding window that keeps every adjudication provisional, the two-month payment deadline that ruins the unprepared, and what you actually receive — a property freed of mortgages by operation of law, but possibly still occupied. Every legal proposition links to its official source, and the final sections give you the Paris practice and the checks to run before raising your hand.

I. Winning the auction without losing the property ten days later

A. How the forced sale works: starting price, visits, and bidding through a lawyer

A judicial auction begins long before the hearing, with the publication of a commandement de payer valant saisie (the formal demand that operates as seizure) and then an orientation judgment in which the enforcement judge either authorises an amicable sale or orders the forced sale. When the judge orders the forced sale, Article R. 322-26 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on the auction timetable and visits provides that the hearing must take place two to four months after the decision, and that the judge sets the arrangements for visiting the property at the pursuing creditor’s request. Read that second point twice if you live abroad: visits happen on fixed group schedules, usually one or two slots organised by the creditor’s lawyer, and there is no private second viewing on demand. If you cannot attend, send a trusted person or instruct your lawyer to attend, because what you do not see before the auction — damp, an occupant who refuses entry, works in progress — becomes your problem after it.

The mise à prix (the starting price set to open the bidding) is fixed by the pursuing creditor, not by the court. Article L. 322-6 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on the starting price states: “Le montant de la mise à prix est fixé par le créancier poursuivant.” The same article gives the seized debtor one shield: if the starting price is manifestly too low, the debtor can ask the judge to set a price in line with the market value of the building and market conditions. For you as a buyer, the practical reading is symmetrical. A strikingly low starting price is normal and proves nothing about the price you will pay; competition usually carries the bidding toward market level, and where nobody bids, the creditor is declared the buyer at the initial starting price. Do not mistake the mise à prix for a valuation, and do not build your financing plan on it.

Bidding itself is a lawyer’s act. At a judicial auction you do not raise your own hand: enchères are placed by an avocat (a member of the Bar) registered with the bar of the court conducting the sale, acting under a written mandate in which you fix your maximum bid. Your lawyer holds the paddle, bids within your ceiling, and stops when you told him to stop. Give the mandate in writing before the hearing, state the absolute maximum including your understanding of the fees, and agree in advance how the lawyer reaches you during the hearing if the bidding approaches your limit. The fees added to the hammer price — the taxed costs of the proceedings and the lawyer’s proportional fees on a statutory scale — routinely add a significant layer above the adjudication price, so your ceiling must be a ceiling for the hammer price with the fees computed on top, not a global budget you discover afterwards. Because the identity of the bidder’s counsel and the terms of the mandate are checked at the hearing, choose a lawyer who actually practises before that court: a Paris auction requires counsel at the Paris Bar, not a well-meaning correspondent from another city who has never attended the audience des criées (the auction hearing).

Two protections of ordinary French house-buying do not exist here, and foreign buyers must internalise both before the hearing. First, there is no ten-day right of withdrawal: the SRU cooling-off period that follows a classic compromis de vente (preliminary sale agreement) has no equivalent at auction, and the fall of the hammer binds you. Second, there is no loan condition: no condition suspensive de prêt (clause making the sale conditional on obtaining a mortgage) can be written into a forced sale, which means your financing must be fully secured — or the cash fully available — before you authorise a single bid. A buyer who bids hoping the bank will follow is bidding to default, and default at auction carries its own statutory punishment, examined in Part II. If you need cross-border financing for a French purchase, the loan offer must be signed and the funds transferable within the payment deadline; allow several weeks for international transfers and French bank compliance checks, because the two-month clock described below does not pause for correspondent banking.

One widespread misunderstanding should be cleared up at this stage, because even anglophone guides repeat it: it is not true that nothing can be done against an adjudication judgment. The Second Civil Chamber’s ruling of 12 April 2018, no. 17-15.418, on appeals against adjudication judgments recalls the exact rule: “le jugement d’adjudication ne statuant sur aucune contestation, n’est susceptible d’aucun recours sauf excès de pouvoir”. An adjudication judgment, which decides no dispute, can only be challenged for excess of judicial power. The door is therefore narrow but real, and the 2022 Béziers case below shows a buyer walking through it successfully. For you as a bidder, the lesson runs in both directions: your victory can only be attacked on that narrow ground, but so can the victory of whoever outbids you.

B. The ten-day surenchere: anyone can outbid you by one-tenth

Winning the auction makes you the adjudicataire (the successful bidder declared buyer at the hearing), but for ten days you are a buyer on probation. Article R. 322-50 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on overbidding provides: “Toute personne peut faire une surenchère du dixième au moins du prix principal de la vente.” Any person — not only those who attended, not only French residents — may file a surenchère (a statutory overbid of at least one-tenth of the principal sale price) that sends the property back to auction. The overbid must reach at least the hammer price plus one-tenth, and it triggers a fresh hearing at which the overbidder and any newcomer may compete.

The formal conditions are strict and lawyer-driven. Article R. 322-51 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on the form of the overbid requires, on pain of inadmissibility, that the overbid be drawn up by a lawyer’s act and lodged at the enforcement judge’s registry within ten days of the adjudication; the lawyer must certify that the client has provided an irrevocable bank guarantee or a bank cheque for one-tenth of the principal sale price. And the same article closes with a sentence every buyer must memorise: “La déclaration de surenchère ne peut être rétractée.” An overbid cannot be withdrawn. The system is deliberately designed so that the ten-day window produces either silence, which consolidates your purchase, or a solvent, committed challenger — never a speculative bid that evaporates.

The Court of Cassation reads these texts exactly as written, refusing to add conditions the legislator did not impose. The Second Civil Chamber’s published ruling of 10 December 2020, no. 19-14.596, on the validity of an overbid quashed a judgment that had declared an overbid inadmissible because it stated no precise amount. The lower court had reasoned that a public judicial sale needed a precise offer for proper advertising; the Court of Cassation answered that the article requires an overbid of at least one-tenth, not a stated sum, so that “la déclaration de surenchère du dixième au moins du prix principal doit, à défaut d’indication contraire, être regardée comme une surenchère du dixième”. An overbid declaration that tracks the statutory formula without naming a figure counts, by default, as an overbid of exactly one-tenth. Two cautions keep this precedent honest. First, it was decided under Article 884 of the Polynesian Code of Civil Procedure, whose wording on this point mirrors the metropolitan articles — the reasoning travels, but cite the metropolitan articles R. 322-50 and R. 322-51 for mainland sales. Second, the leniency runs one way only: it saves an overbid that meets the statutory minimum, and it never excuses missing the ten-day deadline, the lawyer’s act, or the bank guarantee. If you are the adjudicator watching the calendar, day ten is counted strictly; if you are the challenger, lodge early, because a registry queue on the final afternoon is not force majeure.

For a foreign buyer, the surenchère has three concrete consequences. First, do not release funds, order works, give notice on your current home, or instruct a removal company before the ten days expire: until then you own a lawsuit-in-waiting, not a flat. Second, factor the overbid into your bidding tactics: a hammer price pushed one euro above a round number can deter an overbidder who must add a full tenth, while a bargain price invites one. Third, remember that the overbid window also protects you in the opposite direction — if you lose the first hearing, the same ten days let you come back with an overbid of your own, provided you have a local lawyer and a bank guarantee ready before the hearing, not after. Our Paris real estate practice regularly prepares both sides of this window for non-resident clients, because the ten days are won or lost in the preparation done before the first hearing.

II. Paying, purging, and taking possession

A. Consigning the price in two months or losing everything: the folle enchere

Once the overbid window closes without challenge, the adjudication becomes definitive and a two-month clock starts. Article R. 322-56 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on payment of the price requires payment into escrow or consignment with the Caisse des dépôts et consignations (the state-owned deposit institution) within two months of the definitive adjudication, “à peine de réitération des enchères” — on pain of the bidding being rerun. After the deadline, the price bears statutory interest automatically until full payment or consignment. For a buyer transferring funds from London, New York, or Geneva, two months is shorter than it looks: French bank compliance on large incoming transfers, currency conversion, and the mechanics of consignment all consume weeks, so start the transfer machinery the day of the hearing, not the day the overbid window closes.

Failure to pay triggers the folle enchère (the resale procedure after a defaulting buyer’s failure to pay, literally a “mad auction”). Article L. 322-12 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on the defaulting buyer states: “A défaut de versement du prix ou de sa consignation et de paiement des frais, la vente est résolue de plein droit.” The sale is then resolved as of right, the property is put up for sale again, and the defaulting buyer owes the difference if the resale price is lower, without any right to recover sums already paid. Note the asymmetry the text creates: if the resale achieves a higher price, the surplus does not go to the defaulter. Default is therefore a one-way bet against yourself, and no subsequent payment — even tendered just before the new hearing — saves the sale once the judge records the resolution, as the case below demonstrates.

The leading illustration is a file with a cross-border dimension that foreign buyers should read carefully. The Second Civil Chamber’s ruling of 9 June 2022, no. 20-21.352, on the defaulting buyer at resale concerned a Béziers seizure against a couple domiciled in Ireland: the property was adjudicated to a property company, which won again on overbid, paid the fees, but never consigned the price. A certificate of non-consignment was issued, the creditor sought a rerun of the bidding, and the judge resold the lots to a new buyer — without the defaulting company being summoned to the new hearing. The Court of Cassation quashed the resale. Its reasoning, grounded in Article R. 322-69, fourth paragraph, of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on notice of the resale hearing, holds that the seized debtor, the pursuing creditor, the registered creditors, and the defaulting buyer must all be notified of the new hearing date by registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt, because “l’adjudicataire défaillant, propriétaire du bien adjugé tant que la résolution de la vente n’a pas été constatée, doit être appelé à l’audience d’adjudication sur réitération des enchères, à laquelle il est partie”. The defaulting buyer remains the owner until resolution is formally recorded, is a party to the resale hearing, and judging without summoning him is an excess of power. The practical lessons are threefold. First, for the buyer who cannot pay on time: you keep procedural rights, including the right to be heard, but you do not keep the property — the resale goes ahead, and you pay the shortfall. Second, for the buyer at the resale hearing: verify that every party was duly summoned, because a resale won against an unsummoned defaulter can be quashed years later, unwinding your own title. Third, for the non-resident buyer at the first hearing: the Irish domicile of the seized owners in this very case is a reminder that distance explains nothing and excuses nothing — consign the price within two months or do not bid.

B. Mortgages purged by operation of law, but occupants still to be removed

What the buyer receives is defined by two complementary rules: a generous one on mortgages, and a strict one on the limits of the title. Start with the generous rule. Article 2461 of the Civil Code on automatic discharge of mortgages provides: “L’immeuble est, de plein droit, purgé du droit de suite attaché à l’hypothèque dans les cas prévus par la loi, notamment la vente sur saisie immobilière”. The building is discharged as of right from the mortgagee’s right to follow the property into whoever’s hands, in the cases set by statute — first among them the sale on seizure of real property. This purge (the extinction of registered security interests against the buyer) is the great attraction of the judicial auction: the price you consign is distributed to the registered creditors by the court, and you take the property free of the mortgages that burdened the seized owner. Verify in the conditions of sale that all known registrations were properly summoned to the distribution, keep the proof of your consignment, and ensure the adjudication judgment is published at the land registry, because the discharge operates through the procedure and its publicity, not through private negotiation with the banks.

Now the strict rule, which tempers the first. Article L. 322-10 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on the effects of adjudication states: “L’adjudication emporte vente forcée du bien saisi et en transmet la propriété à l’adjudicataire.” Adjudication is a forced sale that transfers ownership — but it continues: “Elle ne confère à celui-ci d’autres droits que ceux appartenant au saisi.” It gives the buyer no rights beyond those the seized owner held. You take the property as it legally is: existing easements survive, and above all, an occupant may still be inside. The auction buys the debtor’s rights, not a vacant flat by presumption. Before bidding, the conditions of sale and the court file disclose the occupancy status — seized owner in place, tenant with a lease, or occupant without title — and your price must reflect the cost, time, and uncertainty of recovering possession. A flat sold occupied at a thirty per cent discount can be a bargain or a trap depending entirely on who occupies it and on what basis, which is why the occupancy line of the file deserves more attention than the starting price.

Where the seized owner stays on after the sale, the law gives the buyer a direct weapon. Article L. 322-13 of the Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures on eviction states: “Le jugement d’adjudication constitue un titre d’expulsion à l’encontre du saisi.” The adjudication judgment itself is an eviction order against the seized party — no separate lawsuit to obtain the right to expel is needed, only enforcement through a court officer, with the usual protections of eviction procedure applying. A 2025 judgment of the Meaux judicial court shows the complete sequence working in practice: after a May 2023 adjudication, the seized couple remained in the house, the buyer had the judgment published at the land registry, and the court declared them occupants without right or title, ordered their eviction, and awarded an indemnité d’occupation (compensation for unlawful occupation) assessed from estate-agency rental estimates, as recorded in the Meaux judgment of 5 February 2025 on eviction and occupation indemnity after adjudication. Three lessons follow. First, publish the judgment at the land registry promptly: opposability to third parties and the distribution machinery depend on it. Second, have a court officer serve a formal order to vacate before assuming the occupant will leave; the judgment is the title, the officer’s act starts the clock. Third, claim the occupation indemnity from the date the occupant lost all right, with rental valuations from local agents to quantify it — the Meaux buyer succeeded precisely because two agencies’ estimates anchored the figure.

Two final cautions complete the picture for non-resident buyers. First, the eviction title covers the seized party, not automatically every third occupant: a tenant whose lease predates the seizure, or family members with independent rights, may require separate proceedings, so have your lawyer map every occupant’s legal basis before you bid, not after. Second, budget the Paris enforcement timeline realistically: between the order to vacate, the statutory delays, the winter truce that suspends most residential evictions, and possible applications for additional time, recovering an occupied Paris flat routinely takes many months even with a perfect title. The mortgage discharge is immediate as of right; possession is a procedure. Price the gap. Our Paris real estate team verifies occupancy status, summons regularity, and distribution records before clients authorise counsel to bid, because at auction the cheapest due diligence is the file you read before the hearing, and the most expensive is the occupant you discover after it.

Conclusion

A French judicial auction compresses an entire property purchase — price discovery, title transfer, mortgage discharge — into a single hearing, then surrounds it with three strict time limits: ten days in which anyone may overbid by one-tenth through a lawyer with a bank guarantee, two months in which to consign the price on pain of a resale whose shortfall you pay, and the immediate need to publish the judgment and organise eviction before occupation hardens into delay. The buyer who respects these three clocks receives a property purged of mortgages by operation of law under Article 2461 of the Civil Code, with an eviction title against the seized owner built into the judgment under Article L. 322-13. The buyer who improvises — financing hoped for rather than secured, funds transferred at the last minute, occupancy unchecked — finances the procedure for everyone else. For a non-resident, the entire operation stands or falls on preparation done from abroad before the hearing: a Paris Bar lawyer mandated with a written ceiling, funds convertible and transferable within two months, the conditions of sale read line by line for occupancy and registrations, and silence accepted for ten days after victory. Bid only when all four are in place.