Cars are often a significant part of a debtor's assets, making them a prime target for creditors. Legislation has developed specific enforcement mechanisms adapted to these valuable mobile assets. Among them, seizure by declaration represents an effective intellectual measure, distinct from thephysical immobilisation of the vehicle.
1. Origins and principle of seizure by declaration
Seizure by declaration originates from a procedure used by the tax authorities: opposition to the transfer of a vehicle registration certificate. This technique was generalised during the 1991-1992 reform of enforcement procedures.
Now governed by articles L. 223-1 and R. 223-2 to R. 223-5 of the French Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures (CPCE), this procedure enables the court commissioner, in possession of a writ of execution, to make a declaration to the relevant administrative authority. This procedure produces the effects of a seizure without requiring the physical apprehension of the vehicle.
2. Seizure by declaration procedure
Prior information and the administration's duty
Before initiating proceedings, the judicial representative must ascertain the legal status of the vehicle. Article R. 223-1 of the CPCE, as amended by decree no. 2023-97 of 14 February 2023, requires the administrative authority to provide the judicial representative with the information contained in the dematerialised register held by the Minister of the Interior, as well as any information relating to the debtor's rights over the vehicle.
This preliminary verification is crucial. In a ruling dated 30 October 2008 (Civ. 1re, no. 07-19.633), the Court of Cassation pointed out that possession of a vehicle without a registration certificate is equivocal. The court commissioner is liable in the event of abusive proceedings for failing to gather the necessary information.
Content and form of the declaration
According to article R. 223-2 of the CPCE, the declaration must contain :
- The debtor's contact details
- Its location (address for a natural person, registered office for a legal entity)
- The registration number and make of the vehicle seized
- Mention of the enforcement order relied on by the creditor
This declaration takes the form of a document issued by a court commissioner and served on the competent administrative authority in the place where the debtor lives. In practice, the court commissioners generally refer to it as a "procès-verbal d'indisponibilité du certificat d'immatriculation".
Service on the debtor
Article R. 223-3 of the CPCE requires a copy of the declaration to be served on the debtor within eight days of the document being delivered to the prefectural authorities. This service must :
- Reproduce the provisions of article R. 223-4 of the CPCE
- Mention in very clear characters the possibility for the debtor to contest the measure before the enforcement judge of the place where he lives
Although it is not expressly stated in the text, the absence of this information should render the deed null and void, as it constitutes substantial information within the meaning of article 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
3. Legal effects of the declaration
Unavailability of registration certificate
The declaration of seizure becomes unavailable as soon as it is handed over to the administrative authority. Article R. 223-4 of the CPCE prohibits the authorities from issuing any registration certificate, de facto preventing any administrative transfer.
This administrative unavailability does not deprive the debtor of the use of his vehicle, but makes it impossible to transfer it legally. Article L. 322-2 of the French Highway Code requires a certificate to be given to the purchaser attesting to the absence of a declaration of seizure and opposition to transfer.
Date of effects of unavailability
There is still some ambiguity as to the precise date on which the procedure takes effect. Article L. 223-1 of the CPCE specifies that the seizure only takes effect from the date of notification to the debtor, whereas articles R. 223-2 and R. 223-4 suggest that the seizure takes immediate effect from the date of notification to the administrative authority.
This distinction has important practical implications: as regards the debtor, the date of the effects is that provided for in article L. 223-1, whereas as regards the administration, it corresponds to the date of service of the notice of unavailability.
Period of validity and renewal
Article R. 223-4, paragraph 2, of the CPCE limits the validity of the declaration to two years from the date of service. After that, it ceases to have effect unless renewed in the same way as the initial declaration.
This lapse raises questions about the release of the vehicle. An amicably agreed or judicially ordered release seems necessary to relieve the administration of its liability, even in the event of expiry.
4. Conflicts and special situations
Conflict with other creditors
Article R. 223-5 of the CPCE specifies that the effects of the declaration may not be prejudicial to the creditor holding a pledge duly registered in accordance with decree no. 2023-97 of 14 February 2023.
In the event of a conflict between a declaring creditor and a creditor benefiting from a seizure-sale on the same vehicle, no priority is legally established. In the absence of an amicable agreement, only a judicial apportionment of the sale price can be envisaged, generally on a pound-for-pound basis.
Disposal or destruction of the vehicle
Administrative unavailability does not give the declaring creditor any preferential right or right of pursuit over any compensation paid by the insurer in the event of the vehicle's destruction, unlike the prerogatives available to the pledgee.
Case law grants the holder of a pledge the benefit of real subrogation on the insurance indemnity (Com., 18 February 1992, no. 90-12.840). There is no such provision for the declaring creditor, who would therefore have an interest in notifying the insurer of his unavailability report in order to preserve his rights.
Plurality of declaring creditors
There is no text prohibiting several successive declarations on the same vehicle. Article L. 521-1, paragraph 2, of the CPCE also provides that the same asset may be subject to several protective seizures.
Administrative practice, however, has often consisted of refusing multiple declarations, giving a de facto right of preference to the first declarant. There is no legal basis for this positionThe text does not give any particular priority to the first referrer.
Seizure by declaration is an effective technique for creditors, but its use requires precise mastery of the formalities and deadlines imposed by law. Disputes are frequent and procedural conflicts are difficult to resolve.
To guarantee your rights in this type of procedure, our firm can provide you with the following servicesexpertise required to secure your debts or challenge an irregular seizure. Personalised support can often help you avoid costly mistakes and optimise your chances of recovery.
Sources
- Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures (CPCE), articles L. 223-1 to L. 223-2 and R. 223-1 to R. 223-13
- Decree no. 2023-97 of 14 February 2023 on publicising the pledge of a registered land motor vehicle or trailer
- Highway Code, articles L. 322-2 and R. 322-4
- Civ. 1st, 30 October 2008, no. 07-19.633, Bull. civ. I, no. 242
- Com. 18 February 1992, no. 90-12.840, RTD com. 1992. 860, no. 21, obs. B. Bouloc
- Répertoire de procédure civile, "Saisie des véhicules terrestres à moteur", Rémy BOUR, Doctor of Law, October 2024
EN 
FR