Owners lost their plots to a municipality through compulsory purchase (expropriation); the administrative court then annulled the declaration of public utility (déclaration d’utilité publique, the decision authorising compulsory purchase), and the order that had transferred their plots fell with it, but the plots could no longer be returned. What does the municipality owe them, and at what date is their loss measured? In a reported decision of 30 June 2016, the Third Civil Chamber of the Cour de cassation (the French supreme court for civil matters) approved a precise formula: the value of the property at the date of the decision finding that it cannot be returned, less the principal compensation received together with interest on it since payment. For the valuer, everything starts from that date.
The facts
Plots belonging to several owners were transferred to the municipality of Salbris by an order transferring ownership (ordonnance portant transfert de propriété, the court order vesting the land). The administrative courts then annulled the order declaring the public utility on which it was based, and the transfer order was annulled in consequence. The expropriation judge (juge de l’expropriation, the civil judge who sets compensation) found that the property was not in a state to be returned. The owners then claimed compensation.
The first-instance judgment set their compensation at €115,802.76, less €94,500. In a ruling of 10 February 2015, the Orléans Court of Appeal overturned it: it set at €442,822.74 the damages owed for the irregular expropriation of property that cannot be returned in kind, and also awarded compensation for non-pecuniary (moral) loss. The municipality appealed against those three points of the ruling.
The ruling gives neither the expropriation and annulment dates, nor the nature of the plots, nor why they could no longer be returned.
The decision
The Cour de cassation dismissed the appeal (Cass. 3e civ., 30 June 2016, appeal no. 15-18.508, reported). Its answer fits in one sentence: “the court of appeal correctly held that the owners of the plots whose transfer of ownership has been annulled and which are not in a state to be returned had to be compensated for the loss of the added value corresponding to the difference existing between the value of those properties at the date of the decision finding that it was impossible to return them and the amount of the principal compensation for dispossession that they had received, increased by interest since its payment” (translated from the French).
The words “correctly held” (exactement retenu) show that the Court does not defer to the lower courts’ assessment: it reviews the rule of calculation and adopts it. The Court’s answer rests on no statutory provision (only Article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure is cited, for legal costs). The summary published with the ruling links the solution to return by equivalent (restitution par équivalent, in money), due when the expropriation order loses its legal foundation.
The appeal also challenged the compensation for non-pecuniary loss; it was dismissed in full, but the Court’s reasoning addresses only the lost added value.
What this changes for valuation
The valuation date is the date of the finding of impossibility. The first term is the value of the plots at the date of the decision finding that they cannot be returned, here the expropriation judge’s: not the date of the transfer order or of the annulment, nor necessarily the date the compensation is set. The valuer first identifies that decision and its date, then establishes the market value (valeur vénale) of the plots at that date, with comparable sales from the same period.
The second term: the principal compensation and its interest. The ruling refers only to the principal compensation for dispossession (indemnité principale): the report isolates it among the sums paid at the time, including the reinvestment allowance (indemnité de remploi) and ancillary compensation. The ruling sets the starting point of interest, the payment, but neither the rate nor the end point; the report details that calculation so it can be adjusted.
Return by equivalent. Since the plots cannot be returned, the owners receive their value at the date of the finding of impossibility, less the principal compensation received and its interest. That difference is what the Court calls the loss of added value. If it is negative, the formula shows no lost added value; the ruling does not deal with that case.
The condition of the plots, their planning classification and the acquiring authority’s works. The ruling does not say in what condition the plots are valued, nor whether the municipality’s improvements count. Nor does it say which planning classification applies, or whether a reclassification caused by the annulled operation is reflected. The report states the assumptions adopted, flags any reclassification linked to the operation and quantifies the works’ effect separately.
Annulment and retrocession: two separate regimes. The ruling of 10 July 2025, presented in the article on retrocession made impossible, addresses a different situation: the expropriation remains valid, but the property was not put to its intended use. There the Court set aside the current value less compensation and interest, and measured the added value from the summons for retrocession (rétrocession, the former owner’s right to buy back property not used as planned) to the definitive recognition of the right, since retrocession does not undo the transfer. Though more recent, that ruling leaves intact the 2016 formula, specific to a transfer deprived of its legal basis by annulment. The valuer therefore first checks the basis of the claim, which dictates the valuation dates.
Other lost added values, other rules. Under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights (right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions), other rulings decide lost added value according to the facts: refused for the former owner of pre-empted land later resold who had taken the initiative of selling (6 October 2016); owed for surrendered land (délaissement, the owner’s right to require purchase of reserved land) that the municipality had made buildable and resold without maintaining its public-interest allocation (18 April 2019); refused for a land reserve (réserve foncière) where the delay was justified by public utility (12 March 2026). The ruling of 30 June 2016 does not refer to that provision: it draws the consequences of the annulled transfer.
What the valuer takes from it
- Compulsory purchase annulled, plots not returnable: the lost added value is their value at the date of the decision finding that return is impossible, less the principal compensation received and its interest.
- Dating that decision comes first: it fixes the valuation date, and therefore the period of the comparable sales.
- The report isolates the principal compensation among the sums received and details the interest calculation, whose rate and end point the ruling leaves open.
- The condition of the plots, the planning classification to apply and the acquiring authority’s works, on which the ruling is silent, call for explicit assumptions and a separate figure.
- Retrocession, pre-emption, surrender and land reserves follow other rules: the basis of the claim dictates the formula.
Further reading
The Compulsory purchase and pre-emption page describes the assignment, its timescale and its fee. The guide Pre-emption by a public body in France: setting a defensible price and the glossary entries indemnité principale, date de valeur and déclaration d’utilité publique complement this article. Two other reported 2016 rulings each have their own article: one on the sub-tenant’s right to compensation after an amicable sale following a public-utility order, the other on pre-empted land resold, with no lost added value for the seller. On the same theme: Retrocession impossible: added value between two dates and Reserved land surrendered then resold buildable: lost gain owed. The decision is available on Légifrance.
What next
An annulled compulsory purchase and plots that can no longer be returned to you?
I establish the value of the plots at the date of the decision finding that they cannot be returned, with market references from that period, setting out the planning classification adopted. The report then sets out the lost added value, after deducting the principal compensation and interest, for the judge or a negotiation.
Free quote, by email or by phone. No commitment before the quote is accepted. Fees are never linked to the value of the property (Charte de l’expertise, Title I, §2.1).
