• Informations concernant l’affaire
    • ID national: Court of Cassation, Judgement 19-13.934
    • État membre: France
    • Nom commun:N/A
    • Type de décision: Décision de la Cour suprême
    • Date de la décision: 09/09/2020
    • Juridiction: Cour de cassation
    • Objet:
    • Demandeur:
    • Défendeur:
    • Mots clés: real estate, purchaser, consumers as professionals
  • Articles de la directive
    Consumer Rights Directive, link
  • Note introductive

    ECLI identifier: ECLI:FR:CCASS:2020:C100454

    In consumer law, the Court of Cassation is demanding as regards the characterisation of the qualities of consumer and professional. As soon as persons are deemed to be exercising a professional activity, even if it is secondary, the rules of the Consumer Code are excluded as soon as these activities are in question. In concrete terms, private individuals who take out real estate loans to finance the purchase of buildings intended for furnished rental exercise a professional activity, which excludes them from the category of consumers and from the possibility of invoking the rules of the Consumer Code.

  • Faits

    By notarial deed dated 6 November 2008, a bank had granted a loan to finance the acquisition of real estate for furnished rental. Following a seizure-assignment procedure conducted by the bank, the borrower summoned the bank to release the seizure invoking irregularities affecting the loan, in the absence of compliance with the provisions of the Consumer Code. The Court of Appeal refused to grant their application.

  • Question juridique

    Can private individuals who take out real estate loans to finance the purchase of buildings intended for furnished rental exercise be included in the category of consumers?

  • Décision

    The judgement notes that although the borrowers' main professional activities are, respectively, that of managerial assistant and sales assistant, Mr C. habitually carries out the ancillary activity of renting furnished accommodation, for which he is duly registered in the RCS, and that the loan at issue was taken out to finance the acquisition of plots of land intended for renting and thus constitutes a loan intended to finance that ancillary professional activity. The provisions of the Consumer Code were therefore not applicable.

    Texte intégral: Texte intégral

  • Affaires liées

    Aucun résultat disponible

  • Doctrine

    Aucun résultat disponible

  • Résultat

    The solution is in line with long-standing case law. It should be noted that registration in the RCS is a criterion used by both the Court of Cassation and the CJEU, without necessarily being conclusive. In this respect, the solutions are therefore convergent.