A seller of farmland finds a buyer; the SAFER (société d’aménagement foncier et d’établissement rural, the French rural land agency, which can pre-empt sales of farmland) pre-empts and offers a lower price than the one agreed. That offer at a revised price requires the express consent of the two government commissioners (commissaires du Gouvernement, the State’s representatives on the SAFER). Must that consent be attached to the notice, on pain of nullity of the pre-emption? No, answers the Third Civil Chamber of the Cour de cassation (French supreme court for civil and commercial matters) in a reported decision of 15 January 2026: it is enough for the notice to mention it, and the useful discussion shifts to the price.
The facts
Informed of a planned sale of plots of land by a couple, SAFER Bourgogne Franche-Comté exercised its pre-emption right and coupled its decision with a revision of the price. The pre-emption decision with a purchase offer was notified to the sellers’ notaire (French civil-law notary) on 14 August 2020.
The sellers sued the SAFER for annulment of its pre-emption decision; the SAFER, for its part, asked for the sale to be declared complete (parfaite), that is, concluded in its favour. On 24 September 2024 the Dijon Court of Appeal dismissed all the sellers’ claims and declared the sale of the plots to the SAFER complete, at the price the SAFER had proposed. It held that the government commissioners’ consents did not have to be attached to the notice of the pre-emption decision.
The sellers appealed: in their view, the express consent of both commissioners must be attached to the notice, on pain of nullity of the pre-emption decision, so that its recipient can check that the decision is lawful.
The decision
The Cour de cassation dismissed the appeal (Cass. 3e civ., 15 January 2026, appeal no. 24-21.703, reported).
It first recalled the mechanism resulting from articles L. 143-10, first paragraph, R. 141-10, last paragraph, and R. 143-12, first paragraph, of the French Rural and Maritime Fishing Code (Code rural et de la pêche maritime): where a SAFER states that it intends to pre-empt “and considers that the price and the conditions of sale are excessive, in particular in the light of the prices charged in the region for properties of the same kind, it sends the seller’s notaire, after the express consent of the government commissioners, a purchase offer drawn up on its own terms” (translated from the French). It then cited article R. 143-12, second paragraph: “this notification must include a statement of the express consent of the government commissioners”.
It then laid down the rule: “It follows that it is not required, on pain of nullity of the pre-emption decision, that the express consent of the two government commissioners be attached to the notification, but only that it be mentioned in it.” The ground of appeal, “which assumes the contrary, is therefore unfounded”. The second argument of the appeal was rejected without specific reasons.
Two requirements can thus be read in the ruling: the commissioners’ express consent must precede the offer at a revised price, and the notice must state it; attaching the consents themselves is not a condition of validity of the pre-emption. The decision does not rule on a notice that would not mention that consent.
What this changes for valuation
The test for the revised price is in the text. The SAFER revises the price only if it considers it excessive, “in particular in the light of the prices charged in the region for properties of the same kind”. The Rural Code itself therefore sets the ground for the discussion. In practice, that means sales of properties of the same nature (arable land, meadows, woodland, vineyards, farm buildings), concluded in the region, preferably in the same area, and at close dates. The report answers with the comparison method (Charte de l’expertise en évaluation immobilière, the French property valuation charter, 6th edition, November 2025, Title III, ch. 2) and, for a farmstead, with a valuation by component: house, outbuildings, land, each with its own references. The annual indicative scale of average market values of agricultural land (barème indicatif de la valeur vénale moyenne des terres agricoles) gives an order of magnitude, without replacing those sales.
Form is checked, formality by formality. When the offer is received, one check is needed: does the notice state the government commissioners’ express consent? If it mentions it, the absence of the consents as attachments is not enough to obtain annulment. Other formalities follow other rules. Notifying the decision to the evicted buyer is an essential formality, sanctioned by automatic nullity (SAFER pre-emption: fifteen days run from the exact address), and without a valid notice the six-month time limit for a challenge does not run against that buyer (SAFER pre-emption: no notice, no time limit for the challenge). These decisions concern different formalities and do not contradict one another.
Here, the failure of the complaint about form leaves the sale at the SAFER’s price. The sale was declared complete in favour of the SAFER, at the price it proposed, and the dismissal of the appeal makes that outcome final. The decision does not say whether the sellers had also asked the court to fix the price. Faced with an offer at a revised price, article L. 143-10 gives the seller a choice within six months: accept the offer, withdraw the property from sale or apply to the court to have the price fixed, failing which the seller is deemed to have accepted the offer. A decision of 28 November 2024 specifies that a seller who has applied to the court within that period may still withdraw the property at any stage of the proceedings (SAFER pre-emption at a revised price: withdrawal before judgment). An independent valuation, carried out as soon as the offer is received, places the agreed price and the SAFER’s price against the market and informs that choice.
The report expected. It states its valuation date, describes the make-up of the property (cadastral areas, crops, leases in force, buildings), cites each sale retained with its date, area and price, and justifies each adjustment. It helps the seller decide, then helps the lawyer if the case goes to court.
What the valuer takes from it
- A SAFER pre-emption with a price revision requires the express consent of the two government commissioners; the notice must mention it, without having to attach it on pain of nullity.
- The decision does not settle the case of a notice silent on that consent: each complaint about form is checked against the provision on which it rests.
- The revised price is discussed on the test set by the text, the prices charged in the region for properties of the same kind, and therefore on comparable sales.
- Once annulment for defect of form is ruled out, the SAFER’s offer stands: the price is then discussed only through the routes of article L. 143-10; here, the sale was declared complete at the price the SAFER proposed.
- Accept, withdraw the property or go to court: the seller’s choice is informed by a valuation carried out as soon as the offer is received.
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 droit de préemption, valeur vénale and méthode par comparaison complement this article. The other decision on the revised price: SAFER pre-emption at a revised price: withdrawal before judgment. On the same theme: SAFER pre-emption: fifteen days run from the exact address and SAFER pre-emption: no notice, no time limit for the challenge. The decision is available on Légifrance.
What next
Has the SAFER pre-empted your sale and revised the price?
Beyond the form of the notice, I value the land and the buildings from comparable sales in the region, to place the SAFER's offer against the agreed price. The report helps you decide, with your notaire or your lawyer, between accepting, withdrawing the property or going to court.
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).
