Succession lawyer in Paris: end co-ownership, protect your share.

Article 815 of the French Civil Code sets the principle that no one can be compelled to remain in co-ownership in undivided shares. Any co-owner can therefore seek division at any time, unless there is a judicial or contractual stay. There are three ways out. The amicable route requires the unanimous agreement of the co-owners on the value of the properties and the composition of the lots. It is quick and recorded in a notarial deed. The judicial route is opened by Article 840 of the Civil Code where there is disagreement. The court appoints a notary and rules on disputes. The amicable transfer of the undivided rights to a third party or to another co-owner remains possible at any time. The Court of Cassation, 15 January 2025, No. 22-24.672, confirmed that co-ownership between bare owners allows each of them to bring an action for division.

Licitation is the auction sale of a co-owned property that cannot easily be divided in kind. It is one way of carrying out the division and takes place before the judicial court. The Court of Cassation, 5 February 2025, No. 21-15.932, published in the Bulletin, the Court quashed a ruling by a court of appeal that ordered a sale by auction without examining whether the properties could conveniently be divided in kind. The judge must check this condition of their own motion, under Article 1377 of the Code of Civil Procedure. A sale by auction therefore requires a prior analysis of whether division in kind or preferential allocation is possible. Where those options are ruled out, the sale by auction is ordered and the reserve price set by the court. The proceeds are distributed among the co-owners according to their rights.

Article 815-5-1 of the French Civil Code allows co-owners holding at least two thirds of the undivided rights to apply to the court for authorisation to sell. The procedure has four steps. First, the majority co-owners state their intention to sell before a notary, by a two-thirds majority. Second, the notary has this intention served on the other co-owners within one month. Third, the minority co-owner has three months to object; failing that, their silence opens the way. Fourth, the judicial court rules on the authorisation and checks that the sale does not excessively infringe the rights of the other co-owners. The sale takes place by auction. This procedure is excluded where ownership is split between bare ownership and usufruct and where a co-owner falls within one of the cases of Article 836 of the Civil Code.

Preferential allocation, provided for in Articles 831 et seq. of the French Civil Code, allows an heir to obtain sole ownership of a property on division, on condition that they compensate the others by an equalisation payment. It applies in particular to the dwelling that the heir occupied as their main residence, to the farm or business they ran and to the movable items needed for that operation. Some allocations are of right, others are optional. The application must be made as part of the division operations, before the court or the appointed notary. The beneficiary becomes sole owner on the day of the final division. The Court of Cassation has held that the heir may withdraw if the value used makes the transaction economically unsustainable. The equalisation payment is calculated on the expert valuation on the day of division.

Calculating a co-owner's share involves several steps. The first step is the valuation of the co-owned properties on the day of division, by expert assessment or by agreement. The second step is the calculation of the debts and claims between co-owners: occupation indemnities, charges paid by one co-owner on behalf of the co-ownership, fruits received. The third step is the collation of any gifts made to certain heirs. The fourth step is the application of the heirs' shares. Each co-owner's net share includes these adjustments. The value used is in principle that of the day of division, except for gifts made as an advance on a share, for which collation is made at the value of the property given according to its condition on the day of the gift and its value on the day of division. A badly calculated file exposes the parties to a lengthy court-appointed expert assessment.

The action for reduction of excessive gifts, provided for in Article 920 of the French Civil Code, is as a general rule subject to a limitation period of five years from the opening of the succession. For gifts made by spouses with community property, the period runs from each death. The Court of Cassation, 5 January 2023, No. 21-13.151, published in the Bulletin, held that a gift of community property is deemed to be made up to one half by each spouse, so that its reduction can be requested by their joint children only in proportion on the opening of each of the successions of the co-donors. An heir who has let the period lapse after the first death keeps the right for the half linked to the second.

Collation is the operation by which an heir notionally returns to the divisible estate the gifts received from the deceased as an advance on their share of the succession. The rule is laid down in Article 843 of the French Civil Code. Collation applies on any division, whether judicial or amicable, and only to gifts or legacies classed as an advance on a share of the succession. Gifts outside the share, exempt from collation, are charged to the disposable portion. The Court of Cassation, 6 November 2019, No. 18-24.332, published in the Bulletin, recalled that a request for collation of a gift can be made only in the course of an action for judicial division and is no longer admissible where the parties have already carried out an amicable division. Care is therefore needed on amicable division.

The family SCI has several advantages over co-ownership in undivided shares. It avoids deadlock by a single co-owner by imposing majority rules set in the articles. It makes gradual transfer easier by gifts of shares and allows the value to be fixed at each gift. It provides a clear organisation of management and rules on transfers. However, the SCI has running costs (accounting, meetings) and exposes the partners to internal disputes where the articles are badly drafted. The Court of Cassation, 17 January 2019, No. 17-26.695, published in the Bulletin, recalled that a bare owner holding shares jointly has the status of partner and may apply for the appointment of a provisional administrator. Co-ownership remains preferable for simple, short-term estates. The SCI is the right choice for significant estates and early transmission.

Several routes exist. The first is the appointment of a provisional administrator by urgent application under Article 873 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The judge orders this measure where management is compromised by a serious dispute. The second is judicial removal of the manager for legitimate cause, at the request of any partner: unauthorised agreements, failure to render accounts, conflict of interest. The third is dissolution of the company for disagreement between partners making it impossible to pursue the corporate purpose. This last route is demanding and is open only in case of persistent paralysis. The fourth is the forced sale of the shares of a partner at fault, provided for by some articles of association. The Court of Cassation, 17 January 2019, No. 17-26.695, secures the status of partner of a bare owner holding shares jointly.

No, unless the other co-owners expressly agree. Article 815-9 of the French Civil Code provides that a co-owner who exclusively uses or enjoys the co-owned property owes an indemnity, unless otherwise agreed. The Court of Cassation, 1 June 2023, No. 21-14.924, published in the Bulletin, recalled that this indemnity is intended to compensate the harm caused to the co-ownership by the loss of fruits and income. However, where the co-ownership concerns only bare ownership and the usufruct is allocated to a third party, no indemnity is due to the co-ownership. The calculation is made on the rental value of the occupied property, with the claim limited to the previous five years under Article 815-10 of the Civil Code. The claim is brought before the division judge.

Securing a transfer of real estate rests on three pillars. The first is an audit of the assets and precise identification of the disposable portion and the forced heirship share. The second is the choice of the right instrument: simple gift, partition by gift, gift with reservation of usufruct, deferred gift. The partition by gift of Article 1075 of the French Civil Code fixes values on the day of the deed and prevents disputes over the value to be used at the time of death. The third is consistency with the matrimonial property regimes and earlier gifts. The firm checks that the sum of the gifts made to each child respects the forced share. An excessive gift may be reduced on the opening of the succession under Article 920. Anticipation is essential. A badly calibrated gift gives rise to disputes lasting on average two to four years after the donor's death.

An action for reduction requires several categories of evidence. First, the claimant's status as a forced heir: certificate of heirship, family record book, estate tax return. Second, the existence and value of the gift: deed of gift, estate tax return mentioning it, valuation report. Third, the calculation of the estate base: inventory of the assets existing at death, earlier gifts, the deceased's debts. Fourth, a demonstration that the gift encroaches on the forced share: a calculated simulation. For disguised gifts, indirect evidence may be needed: bank statements showing a transfer without consideration, third-party statements, comparison with the deceased's lifestyle. The firm builds the demonstration on the documents produced and identifies the useful court-appointed expert assessments.

Yes. The surviving spouse has several rights over the family home. The first is the right to occupy the home and its furniture at no cost for one year from the death, provided for in Article 763 of the French Civil Code. The second is the lifetime right to the home and the furniture in it, provided for in Articles 764 and 765 of the Civil Code, on condition of occupying the home as a main residence on the day of death and expressing the wish to benefit from it within the year. The lifetime right is charged against the spouse's succession rights. The third is preferential allocation of the building actually used as a residence, subject to an equalisation payment, provided for in Article 831-2 of the Civil Code. The fourth is the spouse's own succession entitlement: at the survivor's choice, usufruct of all existing assets or ownership of a quarter where all the children are issue of both spouses, and ownership of a quarter where there are one or more children who are not issue of both spouses. These rights combine with gifts and the matrimonial property regime.