A son has occupied since 1999 a plot detached from the family land, on the strength of a “certificate of sale” signed by his mother, for 28,260 francs, and of a boundary report drawn up by a surveyor. After the mother’s death, his brothers and sisters claim the plot back and demand an occupation indemnity. The Saint-Denis Court of Appeal on Réunion Island sides with him: just title, good faith, more than ten years, ownership has been acquired by prescription. On 18 June 2026 the Cour de cassation (the French supreme court for civil matters) quashed that ruling: the just title of short adverse possession presupposes a transfer granted by someone who was not the true owner, and the court had not found that the mother was not. A paper signed by the owner is either a sale or nothing; it is not a title that lets time run. For family partitions where such arrangements abound, the ruling points back to valuation: of the plot, of the buildings, of the occupation.
The facts
The parents die in 1994 and 2019. In January 2022 seven of their heirs sue three others to recover two plots and for occupation indemnities. One of the defendants claims a plot detached from one of them, which he says he bought from his mother by a deed of 15 June 1999, a certificate in which she declares on her honour that she sold him the plot for 28,260 francs, corroborated by a boundary report drawn up on 18 March 1999 by a surveyor, both signed by the mother.
The Saint-Denis Court of Appeal, on 25 October 2024, holds that these documents prove the existence of the 1999 sale, that they constitute a just title and that the acquisition was made in good faith; the son, in possession for more than twenty years before the writ, has acquired ownership by ten-year prescription. It rejects the occupation indemnity claim against him.
The decision
The third civil chamber quashed the judgment (Cass. 3e civ., 18 June 2026, no. 24-22.826), under article 2265, now 2272, paragraph 2, of the Civil Code: “the limitation period required to acquire ownership of real property is ten years for a person who acquires in good faith and by just title”. It recalls its case law: “the just title referred to in article 2265 of the Civil Code presupposes a transfer of ownership granted by a person who is not the true owner, and a Court of Appeal cannot retain short adverse possession without finding, if need be of its own motion, that the seller of the property was not the true owner”.
By retaining a just title “without finding, if need be of its own motion, that the son’s transferor was not the true owner of the plot sold, the Court of Appeal breached the above provision”. Quashing on ownership of the plot, on its regularisation at the land registry and the land charges registry, and remittal to the same court differently composed.
What this changes for valuation
A just title is not just any piece of paper. Ten-year prescription protects someone who bought, in good faith, from a person who was not the owner, by a deed that would have transferred ownership had the seller been the owner. If the seller was the owner, the deed transfers ownership by itself, provided it is a valid sale; if it is not, a sworn certificate prescribes nothing. After the father’s death in 1994, the mother was in any event probably owner only in part, jointly with her children, which the court of remittal will have to examine. In a partition, the valuer does not classify titles, but takes them into account: a plot “sold” by certificate remains, until decided otherwise, an asset of the estate to be valued. The Court had said the same a few months earlier of co-ownership regulations (Cass. 3e civ., 18 December 2025, no. 24-15.759, reported): a document that does not transfer ownership, even one granting exclusive use of a courtyard, is not a just title.
What the plot is worth, and what was built on it. The 1999 price, 28,260 francs, says little about the current value of a plot detached, serviced or built on since. The report establishes the value of the bare land at the date of partition, then, separately, that of the buildings erected by the occupant. If the plot returns to the estate, an occupant who built in good faith is entitled, under article 555 of the Civil Code, to an indemnity equal, at the owner’s choice, to the added value brought to the land or to the cost of materials and labour, assessed at the date of reimbursement; the valuer quantifies both so that the choice can be made.
The occupation indemnity, pending. The claimants sought an occupation indemnity from 2020. If the son is not the owner, he has privately occupied jointly owned property and owes one, computed on the rental value of the plot as it was, bare land or built on by him, which is not the same figure. The article on the occupation indemnity until partition describes the computation; here the further question is what it is based on.
Regularise rather than prescribe. The case shows the cost of family arrangements without a deed: twenty years later, a claim to recover the land, an appraisal, two levels of court and a quashing. A partition, an allocation or a notarial sale at a documented price would have settled the matter in 1999. When regularisation happens today, it happens at today’s value, with an equalising payment to the other heirs, and the valuation of the plot is its first step.
Boundaries and delimitation. The surveyor’s 1999 report fixed boundaries; it transferred nothing. The Court has already said so of boundary marking, which does not confer ownership. A valuer describing a plot distinguishes what the boundaries say from what the titles say.
What the valuer takes from it
- A certificate of sale signed by the true owner is not a just title; short ten-year prescription does not apply.
- Until decided otherwise, the plot remains an asset of the estate, to be valued at partition.
- The occupant’s buildings are valued separately: added value brought to the land or cost of the works, at the date of reimbursement.
- The occupation indemnity is computed on the property as it was, bare land or built on by the occupant.
- A family arrangement is regularised by a deed at a documented price; otherwise it is settled twenty years later at today’s value.
Further reading
The Market value page describes the assignment, its timescale and its fee. The guides Leaving a family joint ownership in France and Standard court mission: market value for a partition and the glossary entries indivision, soulte and indemnité d’occupation complement this article. On the same theme: Joint ownership: loan repaid by one co-owner follows article 815-13 and Encroachment: demolition is required, the strip of land has a price. The decision is available on Légifrance.
What next
Family land occupied for years on the strength of a piece of paper, and an estate to settle?
I establish the value of the plot, of the buildings put up by the occupant and of any occupation indemnity, so that the partition or the regularisation rests on figures.
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).
