Urbanisme: de nouvelles règles pour le contentieux !

Urban planning: new rules for litigation!

by gmorales on 8 October 2013 | Category: Folders of the month
Urbanisme: de nouvelles règles pour le contentieux ! Urbanisme: de nouvelles règles pour le contentieux !
Urbanisme: de nouvelles règles pour le contentieux ! A working group submitted a report to the Minister of Territorial Equality and Housing on April 25, 2013 proposing reforms in urban planning litigation aimed at framing the applicants' interest in acting, preventing malicious appeals and modify the transaction regime in the event of withdrawal of recourse. An order of 18 July 2013  has amended the code of urban planning but also the code of administrative justice by incorporating most of these recommendations.

The essential modifications are 7 in number:

Rule n ° 1
Article L. 600-1-2 of the urban planning code: the operation against which an appeal may be made must have a direct effect on the conditions of occupation, use or enjoyment of the property which must be held or busy regularly.

The interest in acting is thus framed in a more restrictive way.

Rule n ° 2
Article L. 600-1-3 of the urban planning code: The interest to act against a building permit is now assessed on the date of posting of the building permit in town hall and not necessarily the installation of billboards on the ground that is sometimes posterior.

Rule n ° 3
Article L.600-5 of the urban planning code: the administrative judge now has the possibility of pronouncing a partial annulment during the proceedings in order to allow the permit to be regularized by a modifying permit and even to set a time limit in which the holder of the permit will be able to regularize its situation.

At the initiative of the judge, an amending permit can now be incorporated in the course of proceedings to the original license whose irregularities are thus erased and can no longer be invoked.

Rule n ° 4
Article L.600-7 of the urban planning code: the author of an abusive recourse can be ordered to pay damages to the beneficiary of the building permit if the request has resulted for the latter an abnormal damage. The judgment of the author of the claim for damages must be sought in a separate memorial. It concerns damages awarded to the beneficiary of the building permit, which must therefore be distinguished from the fine for wrongful recourse which does not is not paid to the defendant.

This article is intended to deter abusive claimants who block a construction; it allows the beneficiary of the building permit to no longer have to make a separate appeal to a civil court for a remedy.

Rule n ° 5
Article L. 600-8 of the urban planning code: Any transaction by which a person who has asked the administrative judge to cancel a building permit, to demolish or to develop will undertake to withdraw from this application. consideration for the payment of a sum of money or the granting of a benefit in kind must be registered with the tax authorities.

This obligation aims at dissuading the authors of "malicious" recourse - those who initiate proceedings then interrupts them in exchange for the payment of a sum of money - by the publication with the tax office of the sums paid by the beneficiary of the building permit this which can attract the attention of the tax services in case of regular declaration.

Rule n ° 6
Moreover, a decree n ° 2013-879 of October 1st, 2013 the Code of Administrative Justice has been supplemented by Article R. 811-1-1, which provides that administrative courts shall decide in the first and last instance against building permits or the demolition of a main-use residential building or against allowed to develop a subdivision.

The possibility of appeal is removed in this case and only the way of appeal in cassation will be possible against the judgments pronounced.

Rule n ° 7
The decree of October 1, 2013 also inserted an article R. 600-4 in the code of town planning which provides that the administrative judge, at the request of the defendants, in the litigation of the building permit, to demolish or develop , may set a date beyond which new means can no longer be invoked.

The applicant who attacks a building permit often has an interest in having the procedure as long as possible to block the work operation. To prolong the investigation of the appeal it can raise new means during the procedure.

Consequently, the defendants may ask the judge to set a date beyond which no new plea, whatever the legal cause to which it is attached, can be raised, thus allowing a "crystallization" of the pleas.

File produced by Me Laurent FRÖLICH, associate lawyer.