You invested in a French SAS, a soci\u00e9t\u00e9 par actions simplifi\u00e9e, the simplified joint-stock company that foreign founders use most often, and now you want out. You found a buyer for your shares. Then your French partner answers that the sale is refused, that the other shareholders will exercise their preemption right, or simply stops replying while the buyer sets a deadline. From London, New York, Dubai or Singapore, the situation feels like a trap: your money is locked inside a company governed by articles of association, the statuts, written in French, and every procedural step seems to require a physical presence in France.<\/p>\n
This guide explains, for a foreign shareholder, how a blocked sale of SAS shares actually works under French law and how you force an exit and get paid without moving to France. French law gives the remaining partners strong defensive weapons, the approval clause, the clause d’agr\u00e9ment, and the preemption clause, the clause de pr\u00e9emption, but it also gives the departing shareholder mirror rights: a buyer who is refused must generally be offered a buyback within a short deadline, the price can be fixed by an independent expert, and a sale made behind your back in breach of the statutes can be annulled by a court. You will see which documents to demand first, which deadlines decide everything, how the price is set when the parties disagree, how the transfer is registered and taxed, and how to defend yourself if the company turns the procedure around and tries to exclude you instead. Every acronym is explained, every decisive rule is linked to its official text, and the strategy is designed for an owner who acts from abroad through a French lawyer.<\/p>\n
The first document to read is not your shareholders agreement but the statuts, the articles of association, plus any shareholders pact, the pacte d’associ\u00e9s, which is a separate private contract between some or all shareholders. In a SAS, transfers of shares are free in principle, but the statutes may add contractual locks, and those locks bind everyone once they are in the statutes. The most common lock is the approval clause. Article L. 227-14 of the Commercial Code<\/a> states: “Les statuts peuvent soumettre toute cession d’actions \u00e0 l’agr\u00e9ment pr\u00e9alable de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9.” In plain English, the articles may require any sale of shares to be approved in advance by the company, meaning in practice by the existing shareholders voting under the majority rules set in the statutes. Your buyer is not buying from the company, but the company controls who enters the capital.<\/p>\n Who decides the approval, and by which majority, depends entirely on your statutes: the president, the board, the shareholders collectively, a two-thirds majority, unanimity for certain transfers. Read that clause today, with a sworn translation if your French is uncertain, because the competent body, the voting threshold, the notification address and the response deadline written there will govern every step of your exit. Two companion rules frame the clause. First, an approval clause, like an exclusion clause, can only be introduced or changed by a collective decision of the shareholders taken under the conditions the statutes provide, and a lock-up clause or a change-of-control clause requires unanimity. Article L. 227-19 of the Commercial Code<\/a> provides: “Les clauses statutaires vis\u00e9es aux articles L. 227-13 et L. 227-17 ne peuvent \u00eatre adopt\u00e9es ou modifi\u00e9es qu’\u00e0 l’unanimit\u00e9 des associ\u00e9s.” So if your partners try to add a new approval lock after you announced your sale in order to block you, that amendment is suspect: check whether unanimity was obtained and whether the change applies to a transfer project you had already notified. Second, outside the SAS-specific regime, the general rule for unlisted companies confirms the mechanism. Article L. 228-23 of the Commercial Code<\/a> allows the statutes of a company whose shares are not admitted to trading on a regulated market to subject any transfer of shares to company approval, provided the shares are registered, nominative, shares, which SAS shares always are. The official English-language fact sheet of the French administration on selling SAS shares, hosted on the entreprendre.service-public.fr portal, describes the same sequence: notify the planned transfer, wait for the approval decision, and, if approval is refused, move to the buyback stage. Keep that page as your procedural checklist alongside the statutes: Transfer of shares of a SAS or SASU on the official public service for businesses<\/a>.<\/p>\n A refusal is not the end of the story; it triggers a buyback obligation. SAS statutes governed by approval clauses almost always reproduce the statutory fallback: when approval is refused, the company must, within the deadline fixed by the statutes, arrange the purchase of your shares, either by one or more existing shareholders or by the company itself, at a price agreed between the parties or, failing agreement, fixed by expert valuation. If nobody buys within the deadline, approval is deemed granted and you can sell to your original buyer. This mechanism was tested in a leading Cour de cassation ruling that every foreign shareholder should know. In a dispute where a shareholder of a SAS had notified its plan to sell, suffered a refusal of approval, and then missed the strict contractual timetable for the buyback, the court held the parties to the letter of their statutes. Cour de cassation, Commercial Chamber, 4 January 2023, appeal no. 21-10.035<\/a> recalls first the foundation: “Selon ce texte, les conventions l\u00e9galement form\u00e9es tiennent lieu de loi \u00e0 ceux qui les ont faites.” Agreements lawfully formed stand as law between those who made them. The court then verified that the statutes required the company, after refusing approval, to arrange the repurchase within two months of notification of the refusal, with the price fixed by mutual agreement or under article 1843-4 of the Civil Code<\/a>, and that, if the buyback was not completed at the end of that period, approval was deemed given, unless the president of the commercial court extended the deadline. Because neither side had asked the court for an extension in time and the buyback had not happened, the court concluded that approval had to be treated as granted. For you, the lesson is operational: notify your transfer project by a method that proves the date of receipt, diary the exact buyback deadline written in your statutes, usually two to three months, and if the company stalls, apply to the president of the tribunal de commerce, the commercial court, for an extension only if an expert valuation is genuinely under way; otherwise let the deadline expire and claim deemed approval in writing before completing your sale.<\/p>\n From abroad, run the notification step with discipline. Send the transfer project to the company and to each shareholder by lettre recommand\u00e9e avec accus\u00e9 de r\u00e9ception, the French registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt, or by bailiff service, a signification par commissaire de justice, the officer formerly called huissier, if relations are hostile. State the number of shares, the class, the price, the payment terms and the full identity of the buyer, because an incomplete notification lets the company claim it could not decide. Keep the acknowledgments: every later deadline runs from receipt. Appoint a French correspondent at once, a lawyer or a mandataire, an agent with a written power of attorney, to receive the approval decision, attend any meeting and sign the transfer order, the ordre de mouvement, the slip that records the movement of registered shares from one securities account to another. If the statutes require you to present the buyer in person, your agent can present the file and you can attend by video where the statutes allow it; if they do not, ask for written consent to remote participation before the meeting, and record any refusal, since an unreasonable refusal to let a non-resident shareholder participate can later support a claim of abuse.<\/p>\n One comparison helps foreign owners who hold shares in several French vehicles. If your company is a SARL, a soci\u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e0 responsabilit\u00e9 limit\u00e9e, the private limited company, rather than a SAS, the default rule is stricter for the seller: shares cannot be sold to an outsider without the consent of the majority of shareholders representing at least half of the shares, unless the statutes require a higher majority. Article L. 223-14 of the Commercial Code<\/a> adds the safety net: the transfer project is notified to the company and to each shareholder, silence for three months counts as consent, and if the company refuses, the shareholders must within three months buy or arrange the purchase of the shares at a price fixed under article 1843-4 of the Civil Code, unless you withdraw your project. The SAS version of this safety net lives in your statutes rather than in the statute book, which is why reading them first matters so much. And if your partners ignore the procedure entirely and sell the company or dilute you while you are abroad, the same weapons cut both ways, as the next section shows.<\/p>\n The second lock you may face is preemption. A clause de pr\u00e9emption gives the existing shareholders, or some of them, a priority right to buy your shares on the terms you negotiated with your outside buyer before you can sell to that buyer. In practice the sequence is: you notify the price and conditions obtained from your buyer, each beneficiary has a fixed period, often fifteen to thirty days, to exercise the right on all or part of your shares, and only the shares not preempted can go to the outsider. Preemption does not let your partners set the price unilaterally: they step into the deal you negotiated, at that price, unless the statutes provide a different valuation method that you accepted when you signed. From abroad, protect yourself by notifying a complete, genuine offer: a sham buyer or an inflated price designed to discourage preemption can backfire, because the price also serves as evidence if the tax administration later checks the transfer. Attach the draft share purchase agreement, the buyer’s identity documents and financing proof, and state a clear expiry date for exercising the right. If a partner exercises preemption but then fails to pay within the contractual period, put that partner on formal notice, a mise en demeure, by registered letter, and be ready to sell to your original buyer once the period lapses.<\/p>\n The third possible lock is the lock-up, the clause d’inali\u00e9nabilit\u00e9, which forbids any sale for a defined period. Article L. 227-13 of the Commercial Code<\/a> states: “Les statuts de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 peuvent pr\u00e9voir l’inali\u00e9nabilit\u00e9 des actions pour une dur\u00e9e n’exc\u00e9dant pas dix ans.” The articles may freeze the shares for up to ten years. Such a clause must have been adopted unanimously, and it must be limited in time; a perpetual lock-up is not valid. If you signed the statutes five years ago with a ten-year lock-up, you cannot force a sale today by invoking hardship alone: you must negotiate a waiver, a lifting of the clause voted under the required majority, or wait, unless you can show the clause was never validly adopted. Check the date of adoption, the duration, and whether the clause covers all transfers or only some, for example sales to competitors but not to family members. Founders who entered with a foreign investor should also check the change-of-control clause: article L. 227-17 of the Commercial Code<\/a> allows the statutes to require a shareholder company whose control changes to inform the SAS, failing which its non-pecuniary rights can be suspended and it can be excluded. If your shares are held through a foreign holding company, a restructuring of that holding upstream can trigger this clause in France, so notify early rather than letting your partners discover the change themselves.<\/p>\n The sanction that protects you is severe and symmetrical. Article L. 227-15 of the Commercial Code<\/a> states: “Toute cession effectu\u00e9e en violation des clauses statutaires est nulle.” Any transfer made in breach of the statutory clauses is void. This nullity is your shield if your partners sell shares, or the company issues or reallocates shares, without offering you the preemption or approval the statutes promised you. And a very recent Cour de cassation decision makes that shield easier to raise: you do not need to prove that the seller and the buyer conspired against you. Cour de cassation, Commercial Chamber, 8 July 2026, appeal no. 25-11.354<\/a> holds: “Il r\u00e9sulte de l’article L. 227-15 du code de commerce que l’annulation d’une cession d’actions d’une soci\u00e9t\u00e9 par actions simplifi\u00e9e en raison de sa contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e0 une clause statutaire n’est pas soumise \u00e0 la d\u00e9monstration d’une collusion frauduleuse entre le c\u00e9dant et le cessionnaire.” Annulment of a SAS share transfer for breach of a statutory clause does not require proof of fraudulent collusion between seller and buyer. In that case, shares had been sold without letting the shareholders exercise their contractual preemption right, while the statutes punished any transfer breaching preemption with nullity; the court approved annulment on those two findings alone. Concretely, if you discover from abroad that your partners transferred shares to a newcomer without notifying you, ask your lawyer to demand the share movement register, the registre des mouvements de titres, and the updated shareholder accounts immediately, then bring an annulment action before the tribunal de commerce of the company’s registered office. Act fast: nullity actions are subject to limitation periods, evidence fades, and a buyer in good faith who has held the shares openly for years is harder to dislodge in practice even when the law is on your side.<\/p>\n Two frequent traps deserve a warning before you move to price and paperwork. First, do not confuse the shareholders pact with the statutes. A preemption right written only in a private pact binds only the signatories and is enforced through damages or penalty clauses, while a right written in the statutes can annul the transfer itself against anyone, including the buyer. When you notify your sale, invoke both texts in the alternative so that no partner can hide behind the argument that the pact does not bind the company. Second, do not sign a side letter waiving your rights under time pressure. Partners who block a sale often propose a discount buyback here and now, payable in instalments, against your immediate waiver of preemption or approval for their own incoming investor. Once signed, that waiver is a contract, and courts enforce contracts literally, as the 2023 ruling above recalls. If cash flow forces you to accept instalments, secure them with a bank guarantee, a joint and several guarantee, a caution solidaire, of the buyers, a pledge over the sold shares, and an acceleration clause making the full balance due on first missed payment.<\/p>\n Price is where blocked exits are won or lost. If the statutes fix a formula, a multiple of EBITDA, net asset value, turnover, that formula applies first, because contracts stand as law between the parties. If the statutes are silent or simply refer to an expert, the fallback is statutory. Article L. 227-18 of the Commercial Code<\/a> provides: “Si les statuts ne pr\u00e9cisent pas les modalit\u00e9s du prix de cession des actions lorsque la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 met en oeuvre une clause introduite en application des articles L. 227-14 , L. 227-16 et L. 227-17 , ce prix est fix\u00e9 par accord entre les parties ou, \u00e0 d\u00e9faut, d\u00e9termin\u00e9 dans les conditions pr\u00e9vues \u00e0 l’article 1843-4 du code civil.” Where the statutes do not specify how to price shares bought back under an approval, exclusion or change-of-control clause, the price is agreed between the parties or, failing agreement, determined under article 1843-4 of the Civil Code. The expert procedure of article 1843-4 is the workhorse of French shareholder exits, and its current text is worth quoting because your partners may claim the expert must follow their accountant’s figure. Article 1843-4 of the Civil Code<\/a> states that “la valeur de ces droits est d\u00e9termin\u00e9e, en cas de contestation, par un expert d\u00e9sign\u00e9, soit par les parties, soit \u00e0 d\u00e9faut d’accord entre elles, par jugement du pr\u00e9sident du tribunal judiciaire ou du tribunal de commerce comp\u00e9tent, statuant selon la proc\u00e9dure acc\u00e9l\u00e9r\u00e9e au fond et sans recours possible.” The value is set, where disputed, by an expert appointed by the parties or, failing agreement, by the president of the judicial or commercial court ruling under the fast-track procedure on the merits, with no appeal against the appointment. And the same article adds a sentence that protects you against a rigged method: “L’expert ainsi d\u00e9sign\u00e9 est tenu d’appliquer, lorsqu’elles existent, les r\u00e8gles et modalit\u00e9s de d\u00e9termination de la valeur pr\u00e9vues par les statuts de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou par toute convention liant les parties.” The expert must apply any valuation rules and methods contained in the statutes or in any agreement binding the parties, where such rules exist. In practice this means: first, check whether your statutes or pact impose a method, and the expert must follow it; second, where no method is imposed, the expert values the shares freely as of the relevant date, typically using several approaches, discounted cash flows, comparables, net assets, and weighting them; third, the expert’s figure binds the parties on value, even if one side considers it too high or too low, except in narrow cases of gross error.<\/p>\n Run the valuation phase as a procedure, not as a negotiation over coffee. Propose an independent expert jointly with the company in writing, naming two candidates with corporate valuation experience in the company’s sector, and set a fifteen-day deadline for agreement. If the company refuses or stays silent, petition the president of the tribunal de commerce for appointment, attaching the statutes, the refusal of approval, proof of notification dates, and the draft accounts for the last three financial years. From abroad, you do not need to attend: your lawyer files the petition, and the expert works on documents. Feed the expert a complete file: certified accounts, management accounts for the current year, the business plan the partners themselves approved, bank statements showing cash, major contracts, off-balance-sheet liabilities, and evidence of any distributions or shareholder loans, the comptes courants d’associ\u00e9s, the current accounts through which shareholders lend money to the company. Warn the expert in writing of any event between the reference date and the report that depresses or inflates value artificially, for example a sudden exceptional distribution voted after your exit notice. And remember the administration’s warning on the official fact sheet: a manifestly fictitious or derisory price can invalidate the transfer or be reclassified as a disguised gift by the tax authorities, so a price agreed at a discount to stop the fight must still be defensible, documented by a valuation note, and consistent with the accounts.<\/p>\n Once price is fixed, the paperwork must be executed in the right order, because a foreign seller is audited on paper, not on intent. The transfer of registered SAS shares is recorded by an ordre de mouvement, the transfer order signed by the seller, plus an update of the shareholder accounts and the share movement register held at the registered office. A written share purchase agreement, an acte de cession, is not strictly required for SAS shares but the administration recommends drafting one to secure the terms, and you should always have one when selling from abroad: identity of parties, number and class of shares, price, adjustments, guarantees of liabilities, the garantie d’actif et de passif, payment date, and the tax declarations. Next comes tax registration. Article 726 of the General Tax Code<\/a> provides that “Les cessions de droits sociaux sont soumises \u00e0 un droit d’enregistrement” at a rate set, for transfers of shares of unlisted joint-stock companies, at “A 0,1 %”. Budget 0.1 percent of the sale price for SAS shares, declared and paid through the online declaration of transfers of rights, the impots.gouv.fr portal, within one month of the transfer, a step the official service-public fact sheet details with a link to the tax administration’s FAQ. Then update the company’s public face: if the sale changes control, the managers or the beneficial owners, file the update on the Guichet unique, the single online business formalities portal run by the INPI, the Institut national de la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 industrielle, the national industrial property office that operates the register, so the RCS, the registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s, the trade and companies register kept by the greffe, the court clerk’s office of the commercial court, and the RNE, the registre national des entreprises, the national business register, show the new shareholder map and the RBE, the registre des b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs, the beneficial owners register, no longer names you. The INPI portal for business formalities is here: INPI formalities for companies, Guichet unique<\/a>. Finally, if the buyer is a competitor or a foreign investor taking control, check whether merger control or foreign investment screening, the autorisation IEF, the foreign investment authorization for sensitive sectors, applies to the buyer; that clearance is the buyer’s burden, but make your sale conditional on it, a condition precedent, so you are not stuck with a signed deal the buyer cannot legally close.<\/p>\n Non-resident sellers must also clear the personal tax question before signing, or the net proceeds will surprise them. French domestic law can tax capital gains of non-residents on substantial holdings in French companies, while tax treaties often allocate the taxing right differently depending on the seller’s residence, the percentage held and the nature of the shares. Do not guess: ask your French accountant for a written residence and treaty analysis before the price is locked, because the buyer may have to withhold at source, and the withholding rate applied without a treaty form is painful to recover later. Keep every proof of your acquisition cost, subscription forms, capital increase notices, purchase agreements, and of your non-residence, tax notices from your home country, because the 0.1 percent registration duty is only the visible part: the capital gain computation is where files from abroad most often fail for lack of documents. Founders who are selling as part of a wider departure from France should coordinate with counsel handling their personal position, since the company sale, the director’s resignation and the end of French tax residence form one calendar, not three.<\/p>\n Partners who want to keep your money but remove your voice sometimes reverse the pressure: instead of buying your shares at a fair price, they vote your exclusion. The SAS statutes may allow the forced buyout of a shareholder, and the legal basis is explicit. Article L. 227-16 of the Commercial Code<\/a> states: “Dans les conditions qu’ils d\u00e9terminent, les statuts peuvent pr\u00e9voir qu’un associ\u00e9 peut \u00eatre tenu de c\u00e9der ses actions. Ils peuvent \u00e9galement pr\u00e9voir la suspension des droits non p\u00e9cuniaires de cet associ\u00e9 tant que celui-ci n’a pas proc\u00e9d\u00e9 \u00e0 cette cession.” The statutes may require a shareholder to sell, and may suspend that shareholder’s non-pecuniary rights, meaning voting and information rights, until the sale happens. Combined with a change-of-control clause, this weapon can be pointed at a foreign holding company that restructured upstream without notifying Paris. If you receive a letter convening you to a meeting on your exclusion, treat it as the most urgent mail of the year: the timetable is measured in days, and silence is read as acquiescence.<\/p>\n Cour de cassation case law sets two guardrails that protect a foreign shareholder facing exclusion. First, the exclusion clause itself does not need to list every possible ground in advance to be valid in a variable-capital company. Cour de cassation, Commercial Chamber, 9 November 2022, appeal no. 21-10.540<\/a> holds: “Il r\u00e9sulte de l’article L. 231-6, alin\u00e9a 2, du code de commerce qu’est licite une clause des statuts d’une soci\u00e9t\u00e9 commerciale \u00e0 capital variable stipulant que tout associ\u00e9 peut \u00eatre exclu de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 pour justes motifs par une d\u00e9cision des associ\u00e9s r\u00e9unis en assembl\u00e9e g\u00e9n\u00e9rale statuant \u00e0 la majorit\u00e9 fix\u00e9e pour la modification des statuts, quand bien m\u00eame cette clause ne pr\u00e9cise pas les motifs d’exclusion.” A clause allowing exclusion for just cause by the shareholders voting with the majority required for amending the statutes is lawful even if it does not spell out the grounds. Do not therefore waste your defense arguing the clause is void for vagueness alone; attack the motive, the procedure and the price instead. Second, procedure is where exclusions die. Cour de cassation, Commercial Chamber, 12 February 2025, appeal no. 23-20.079<\/a> recalls the contractual foundation, “Aux termes de ce texte, les conventions l\u00e9galement form\u00e9es tiennent lieu de loi \u00e0 ceux qui les ont faites.”, then measures the convening letter against the statutes as written, not against an ideal full disclosure file. The court found that where the statutes required the grounds of exclusion to be notified to the shareholder concerned, the letter convening the shareholder to the preliminary meeting on the ground that he had been working for a competing company satisfied that requirement, even though it did not name the competing company, describe the activity there, or attach the company’s evidence. The exclusion was therefore sent back for re-examination rather than annulled on that ground. The practical reading for a foreign owner is double-edged but clear: a short statement of the grounds in the convening letter can be enough, so you must use the interval before the meeting to demand the full file, the exhibits, the employment or contract evidence, the client lists, the accounting documents, and to file written observations with proof of receipt, in French, before the vote. If the statutes provide for a preliminary hearing, attend it through your lawyer, speak on the record, and have the minutes reflect every document you requested and every answer refused.<\/p>\n Your defense file from abroad follows a fixed checklist. First, challenge standing and quorum: who convened the meeting, was the convening period respected, were you given the grounds in time to prepare, did excluded votes count toward the majority. Second, challenge the motive: a disagreement over strategy, your non-residence, or your request to sell at a price your partners dislike is not, by itself, a just cause for exclusion; demand the precise facts, dates and exhibits, and show your compliance, capital paid up, current account documented, non-compete respected. Third, challenge the price using the same article 1843-4 expert route described above, because exclusion without a fair price is expropriation by another name: refuse any contractual price disconnected from value, request the expert in writing, and petition the court president if the company stalls. Fourth, resist the suspension of your rights beyond what the statutes allow: suspension of voting rights pending the sale may be contractual, but blocking your access to accounts needed for your defense, or voting through a capital increase that dilutes you while you are suspended, invites annulment. Ask the tribunal de commerce for interim relief, a r\u00e9f\u00e9r\u00e9, an emergency court order, to suspend the effects of an irregular exclusion, appoint a provisional administrator, or freeze any capital operation until the court rules on the merits.<\/p>\n Keep the wider picture in view while you fight the exclusion. If you are also the president, the directeur g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, or a board member of the SAS, your corporate office, your mandat social, is separate from your shares: exclusion as a shareholder does not automatically remove you as manager unless the statutes link the two, and resignation as manager does not sell your shares. File the manager change on the Guichet unique if you go, because as long as the RCS names you, creditors and the URSSAF, the unions de recouvrement des cotisations de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale et d’allocations familiales, the social security collection agencies, may still come to you. Preserve the company’s documents you are entitled to as a shareholder, the last three years of accounts, the shareholder register, the minutes of the meetings that concern you, before access is cut; French law punishes the misuse of company assets, the abus de biens sociaux, but it also protects the shareholder’s right to information, and a departing shareholder who kept copies of what he was entitled to receive is far stronger than one who must ask the court to order production. And if the exclusion vote has already been held when you learn of it from abroad, count the limitation period from the day you received reliable notice, have a lawyer inspect the minutes at the registered office, and file for annulment before the commercial court without waiting for a translation: the writ can be regularized, the deadline cannot.<\/p>\n A blocked sale of SAS shares is not a dead end but a procedure with three act structure: notify a complete transfer project, force the company to approve or buy back within the contractual deadline, and have the price fixed by agreement or by the article 1843-4 expert. The approval clause of article L. 227-14 and the nullity sanction of article L. 227-15 frame the contest; the 2023 ruling on deemed approval after a missed buyback deadline and the July 2026 ruling on annulment without proof of collusion give the foreign shareholder two recent, quotable weapons; the price regime of article L. 227-18 with the court-appointed expert secures payment at value rather than at the discount your partners propose; and the exclusion case law of 2022 and 2025 tells you exactly how to defend yourself if the company reverses the pressure. From abroad, everything depends on paper and dates: registered notifications, a diary of the buyback deadline, a complete valuation file, registration of the transfer with the 0.1 percent duty, and updated RCS and beneficial owner records on the Guichet unique. Build that file from the first day, act through a French lawyer who holds the calendar, and a refusal from Paris becomes what the law intended it to be: not a confiscation, but the start of a priced exit.<\/p>\n A telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer of the firm to review your statutes, your buyer offer and the best exit route, approval, preemption or expert valuation. Call +33 6 46 60 58 22<\/a> or write via the contact page<\/a>. For founders still structuring their French presence, see also the complete setup guide for foreign founders, from bank account to Kbis to first hire<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Your French partners refuse your share buyer or exercise preemption. Approval, buyback deadlines, expert price and annulment routes for a foreign shareholder exit.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":16421,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kj_source_type":"","_kj_official_id":"","_kj_official_url":"","_kj_judilibre_id":"","_kj_jur":"","_kj_lieu":"","_kj_chambre":"","_kj_rg":"","_kj_date":"","activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","footnotes":""},"categories":[80314,80313],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2120452","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-decryptage","category-doing-business-in-france"],"yoast_head":"\nB. Preemption, Lock-Up and the Sale Made Behind Your Back That Courts Annul<\/h3>\n
II. How a Foreign Shareholder Forces the Exit From Abroad and Gets Paid the Right Price<\/h2>\n
A. What Price You Will Receive and Who Decides It When You Disagree<\/h3>\n
B. When the Company Turns the Weapon Around: Exclusion and Your Defense From Abroad<\/h3>\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n
Need a quick opinion on your case<\/h2>\n