A condominium association's right to claim damages for hidden defects in a building sold with known issues.
Contents
On the action for damages
On the prescription of the union's action
On the action for damages
On the prescription of the union's action
Get this table of contents for free after login.
Extract
[...] In this case, the selling company had knowledge of the defect in that before the sale, it had work done related to the building's covering. Therefore, the union can exercise a claim for damages. This action for damages suffered due to a hidden defect is not subject to the exercise of a redhibitory or estimatory action, so it can be exercised independently. (Com June 2012, n°11-13.176). Therefore, the union can exercise the action for damages, independently of any other action. Thus, the action for damages is not subject to any other action, so the union is entitled to exercise it independently. [...]
[...] De plus, the Court of Cassation has considered that defects in waterproofing of a roof terrace (Cass. civ October 2004, n°02-21.088) and serious disturbances affecting a dwelling making it unfit for use (Cass. civ. 3and October 1995, n°93-14.879), are of a nature to justify the exercise of an action in guarantee of latent defects. Therefore, the condominium owners' association is entitled to exercise such an action. On the action for damages Within the framework of the guarantee of latent defects, the buyer has the choice between two actions, namely the estimatory action, that is to say, keep the thing and obtain a partial refund; or the redhibitory action, that is to say, return the thing and obtain a total refund (Article 1644 of the Civil Code; Cass. [...]
[...] However, at the beginning of the year, the association obtained a judicial expertise report revealing hidden defects related to the roof. The association wants to sue the company for payment of the roof repair work. The question is, on the one hand, whether the action for damages is not related to a possible action by the buyers and, on the other hand, whether the action of the condominium associations is not prescribed In preliminary remarks, the guarantee of hidden defects is the only foundation allowing for an action due to the defects of the sold thing (Cass. [...]
[...] In this case, the sale took place in 2022, and the judicial expertise report took place 'at the beginning of the year', it is therefore presumed that the report is dated January 2026. The union is therefore presumed to have had knowledge of the defect in January 2026 upon taking knowledge of the judicial expertise report. Therefore, neither the 2-year period from the discovery of the defect, nor the 20-year period has expired. Thus, the union's action is not prescribed. [...]
