// legal watch

The law moves, the courses follow

French construction law evolves every week. This watch lists the recent rulings that matter — drawn from the firm's publications on karila.fr, from Bulletin-reported rulings and from the Cour de cassation chamber newsletters. Every ruling is verified on Judilibre (the Cour de cassation's public database) before being folded into the relevant courses.

Watch up to date as of 2 July 2026.

9 entries

featured2 July 2026Subject 02

Optional professional indemnity insurance (RCD): the cap-at-operation-cost clause delimits the insured risk

For works not subject to the compulsory ten-year (decennal) liability insurance obligation, the clause in the rider capping cover at the cost of the operation (and not merely at the amount of the insured's contract) delimits the insured risk: once the cap is exceeded without an expressly agreed extension, the insurer does not owe cover — without there being any occasion to apply the proportional capital-sums rule under art. L. 121-5 C. assur., which is specific to under-insurance (Cass. civ. 3e, 2 juill. 2026, n° 24-12.598, F-D). The judgment sheds light, by contrast, on the boundary between compulsory and optional professional indemnity insurance (RCD) examined in lecture 5 of module 02.

See course 5 — La RCD et la notion de constructeur (in French) →The commentary on karila.fr (French) ↗

June 2026

25 June 2026Subject 03

Group of contracting firms: the member suing its agent falls within the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts

The member of a joint venture of contracting firms who complains that the common agent committed a fault in assessing the late-completion penalties charged to it, and sues the agent in contractual liability, falls within the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts: since the parties are bound by a private-law contract and the action calls into question neither the public building owner nor the final character of the allocation of penalties, the dispute concerns the performance of that private contract, not that of the public works contract (Cass. civ. 3e, 25 juin 2026, n° 24-14.360, FS-B). The judgment sheds light on the division of jurisdiction addressed in course 9 of subject 03.

See course 9 — Contentieux du marché et synthèse (in French) →

25 June 2026Subject 03

Lump-sum contract: art. 1794 does not confine the building owner

The discretionary right to terminate a lump-sum contract does not deprive the building owner of the right to terminate under the conditions of ordinary law, by relying on the seriousness of the contractor's breaches — and thereby escaping compensation for loss of profit (Cass. civ. 3e, 25 juin 2026, n° 24-18.064, FS-B). The judgment is analysed in course 8 of subject 03.

See course 8 — La fin du marché (in French) →The commentary on karila.fr (French) ↗

11 June 2026Subject 01

Intermediate defects: the property developer answers only for its own personal fault

The property developer, bound by the obligations under art. 1792 à 1792-3 C. civ., incurs contractual liability for intermediate defects only on proof of a personal fault: the mere fault of the contractor whose intervention it guaranteed does not suffice (Cass. civ. 3e, 11 juin 2026, n° 23-22.360, FS-B, partial quashing). The judgment reserves the scope of a clause in the development contract extending the developer's liability, on which the quashing was pronounced for failure to respond to submissions. Incorporated into course 7 of subject 01.

See course 7 — Désordres intermédiaires, droit commun et faute dolosive (in French) →

May 2026

28 May 2026Subject 02

DO insurer: sanctions fixed on an exhaustive basis

Art. L. 242-1 C. assur. exhaustively fixes the sanctions for breaches by the dommages-ouvrage insurer: even a refusal of cover notified without sufficient investigation cannot give rise to compensation on the basis of ordinary contractual liability (Cass. civ. 3e, 28 mai 2026, n° 24-10.463, published). The limit remains: pre-financing must remain effective. Incorporated into course 4 of subject 02.

See course 4 — La DO : procédure d'indemnisation et délais (in French) →

March 2026

12 March 2026Subject 03

The delegated building owner lacks standing to defend

The agent acting in the name of the principal lacks standing to defend the action for payment of the termination indemnity: it is the building owner, not its delegate, who must be sued (Cass. civ. 3e, 12 mars 2026, n° 24-14.087). The judgment is analysed in course 1 of subject 03.

See course 1 — Le choix du montage (in French) →The commentary on karila.fr (French) ↗

November 2025

27 November 2025Subject 03

Subcontracting: the term of the bond under control

The bond provided for by art. 14 of the 1975 Act may limit its commitment in time, but the clause is only valid if it does not deprive the subcontractor of the ability to call on the guarantee before the price of its works falls due (Cass. civ. 3e, 27 nov. 2025, n° 23-19.800, published). Incorporated into course 7 of subject 03.

See course 7 — La sous-traitance (2) : le paiement du sous-traitant (in French) →

October 2025

9 October 2025Subject 02

Ten-year time-bar: acknowledgment interrupts nothing

The ten-year period under art. 1792-4-1 à 1792-4-3 C. civ. is a time-bar (forclusion) period: the builder's acknowledgment of liability — even followed by gratuitous remedial works — does not interrupt it, and the time-barring of the decennial action does not entail the time-barring of the action against its own insurer (Cass. civ. 3e, 9 oct. 2025, n° 23-20.446). Incorporated into course 8 of subject 02.

See course 8 — Prescription et forclusion (in French) →

September 2025

11 September 2025Subject 01

Decennial presumption: an undetermined cause does not save the builder

Where the seat of the defects lies within the builder's sphere of intervention, the fact that their exact cause remains undetermined does not rule out the presumption of liability: only an extraneous cause is exonerating (Cass. civ. 3e, 11 sept. 2025, n° 24-10.139). The judgment is analysed in course 6 of subject 01.

See course 6 — La décennale : régime (in French) →

The watch is updated regularly, and every ruling that deserves it enriches the relevant course sheet — the course content reflects the state of the law as of the latest watch.