Charge Of Proof Of Precarity
LexInter | November 25, 2006 | 0 Comments

Charge Of Proof Of Precarity

FRENCH REPUBLIC
IN THE NAME OF THE FRENCH PEOPLE

ON THE SINGLE SUBMISSION: WHEREAS M GIRODET COMPLAINS AGAINST THE STOP ATTACKING HIS REQUEST FOR THE RETURN OF A PAINTING LOCATED IN THE HOUSE HE HAD SOLD AM SEGEALON, ON THE REASONS THAT HE DID NOT DEMONSTRATE NOT THAT THE TABLE HAD BEEN LEFT IN DEPOSIT, WHEREAS BY REJECTING UNDER THESE CONDITIONS THE OWNER’S CLAIMS ACTION, BASED, ACCORDING TO THE SUBMISSION, NOT ON A DEPOSIT CONTRACT BUT “ON THE RIGHT OF PROPERTY” OF M GIRODET ON THE DISPUTE TABLE, WHICH RIGHT IS CONSTANT FOR THE PERIOD PRIOR TO THE SALE, THE COURT OF APPEAL REVERSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF;
BUT WHEREAS THE PRESUMPTION RESULTING FROM POSSESSION IMPLIES FOR THE CLAIMANT, WHO CLAIMS TO HAVE PRECARIOUSLY DELIVERED FURNITURE TO THE DEFENDANT, THE RESPONSIBILITY OF JUSTIFYING THE PRECARITY OF POSSESSION, IN FAILURE OF WHAT THE DEFENDANT IS FOR THE DEFENDANT. TO CONSERVE, WITHOUT BEING OBLIGED TO PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF THE TRANSLATIVE ACT THAT SHE INVITES AS A CAUSE OF HIS POSSESSION;
IT FOLLOWS THAT THE COURT OF APPEAL, WHICH CONSIDERED THAT M GIRODET DID NOT RETURN THE PROOF OF A DEPOSIT CONTRACT CONCERNING THE DISPUTE TABLE, DID NOT REVERSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF;
THAT THE SUBMISSION IS NOT FOUNDED;
FOR THESE REASONS: DISMISSES THE APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 23 DECEMBER 1980, BY THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LYON,

Publication: Bulletin of judgments Cour de Cassation Civil Chamber 1 N ° 298
Contested decision: Lyon Court of Appeal (Chamber 1) 1980-12-23
Case law precedents: ID. Court of Cassation (Civil Chamber 1) 1962-02-07 Bulletin 1962 I N. 91 p. 81 (REJECTION).

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.


CAPTCHA Image
Reload Image