If constructability is restricted, the land is not "to be built on"

This is what the Court of Cassation reminded an owner who was expropriated while his land was located in a building zone for public facilities only or for the limited extension of existing buildings.

This owner argued that such reasoning would amount to adding a condition to the law which is already very restrictive. The first legal condition for expropriated land to be considered "to be built on" is that it is located in an area that local regulations have classified as buildable. Since construction is permitted, deduced this owner, the land can well be qualified as “building” land.

But the Court of Cassation rejected this assertion. If only a few types of construction are precisely listed, it is because the land is located in a generally unbuildable zone, she replied in substance.

It had already ruled in this way in January 2012 for a rural plot located in the natural zone of the urban plan but on which the farmer alone had the right to build for his professional needs. This right reserved for the farmer does not make the land buildable, she said.

The judges thus dismiss an argument developed in particular during expropriations by owners who hope that their property, if it is declared located in a building zone, can then be classified "to be built on". But the law and jurisprudence are very favorable to expropriators and for this it will be necessary that it be considered sufficiently close to important road networks, drinking water, electricity and sanitation.

(Cass. Civil 3, 2.3.2022, V 20-23.489).