The fundamental principle governing debts in French law is the general right of lien of creditors. Anchored in Articles 2284 and 2285 of the Civil Code, this authorises a creditor to seize the debtor's assets to obtain payment owed to him. However, this power is not without limits. The legislator has established a set of rules designed to protect the debtor, in order to preserve his dignity and ensure a balance between the interests involved. The inalienability of certain assets is one of the most powerful of these bulwarks. It renders certain assets untouchable, removing them from the reach of creditors. These mechanisms form part of the broader framework of overall protection of the debtor in enforcement proceedingsThis is a technical field where knowledge of the exceptions is as important as mastery of the rule.
Understanding the legal inalienability of assets
The inalienability of an asset is a legal characteristic that prevents it from being sold or transferred. When it derives directly from the law, it is binding on everyone, without the need for the debtor to take any voluntary action. This protection is reserved for specific categories of property, due to their nature or economic function. The aim is either to preserve the integrity of an economic unit or to guarantee the survival of a company in difficulty.
Buildings by destination and specific property rights (usufruct, dwelling, easements)
The law provides an initial form of protection for immovable property. Buildings by destination, defined as movable objects that the owner has attached to the land in perpetuity, cannot be seized separately from the main building. Article L. 112-3 of the French Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures enshrines this rule: a chimney, sealed shutters or farm machinery cannot be seized without seizing the dwelling or farmland to which they are materially or economically attached. The logic is to avoid destroying the value of the whole by dismembering it. The only exception is where the creditor has financed the purchase of these specific items; he retains the right to seize them separately.
Certain property rights also benefit from special protection. This is the case with rights of use and habitation, governed by articles 630 et seq. of the Civil Code. These rights are strictly personal to their holder and cannot be transferred. Consequently, they cannot be seized. It is impossible for a creditor to sell the right to live in a dwelling that has been granted to his debtor. Similarly, easements, which are charges imposed on one piece of land for the use of another piece of land (such as a right of way), cannot be seized independently of the land to which they are attached.
Assets essential to the continuation of a company under insolvency proceedings
When a company is experiencing economic difficulties, the law gives priority to safeguarding the company over the immediate satisfaction of individual creditors. In this context, inalienability becomes a recovery tool. Under article L. 626-14 of the French Commercial Code, assets deemed essential to the continuation of the business can be declared inalienable as part of a safeguard plan. The purpose of this measure, which cannot exceed the duration of the plan, is to freeze part of the assets in order to give the company the means to reorganise and continue its business. A similar provision exists in the context of a sale plan, where the court may prohibit the disposal of certain assets sold for a specified period.
This rule is a clear illustration of the impact of insolvency proceedings on enforcement. The collective interest, which includes maintaining jobs and the economic fabric, takes precedence over the individual right of creditors to sue, who find themselves constrained by collective discipline.
Assets removed by the personal will of the debtor or a third party
In addition to legal protections, it is sometimes possible to render an asset inalienable by an act of will. However, this option is highly restricted to prevent debtors from organising their own insolvency to the detriment of their creditors. In such cases, inalienability results either from a gift granted by a third party, or from specific legal mechanisms enabling an asset to be affected.
Inalienability clauses in gifts (donations, wills)
A donor or testator can pass on an asset while prohibiting its beneficiary (the donee or legatee) from selling it. This is known as an inalienability clause, and is governed by article 900-1 of the French Civil Code. To be valid, such a clause must meet two strict conditions: it must be temporary and justified by a serious and legitimate interest. The interest may be, for example, to ensure that the beneficiary keeps a roof over his head until he comes of age, or to keep a property in the family estate for a generation. As long as the clause is valid, the property cannot be seized by the beneficiary's personal creditors. Article L. 112-2 of the Code des procédures civiles d'exécution confirms this, while allowing for one exception: creditors whose debt arose *after* the gift or the opening of the legacy may ask the judge for authorisation to seize the property, for the portion he determines.
Trusts as a means of protecting assets
The trust, introduced into French law in 2007, is a mechanism whereby a person (the settlor) transfers assets to a manager (the trustee) who administers them for a specific purpose on behalf of one or more beneficiaries. As specified in article 2011 of the Civil Code, the assets transferred in this way form a special-purpose asset, distinct from the personal assets of the trustee and those of the settlor. The consequence for the settlor's personal creditors is radical: these trust assets are impervious to their claims. Article 2025 of the Civil Code is very clear: the fiduciary estate may only be seized by the holders of claims arising from its own management or conservation. It is a powerful asset protection tool, although its use remains complex.
Specific allocation of sums to certain accounts (documentary credits, PELs, unused credit lines)
Certain sums deposited in bank accounts may benefit from a form of relative unseizability due to their specific purpose. This is the case for sums promised by a bank under an irrevocable documentary credit, which are considered to be specifically earmarked for payment of a commercial transaction. Case law has also examined the fate of housing savings plans (PEL). Although the sums in these plans are frozen for a certain period, the Cour de cassation considers that they can still be seized, as the subscriber can always decide to close the plan, even if he or she loses the associated tax benefits and premiums (Civ. 2e, 29 May 1991, no. 90-11.714). Another situation concerns unused credit lines. A credit facility is a promise to lend, but the loan is not formed until the funds are actually drawn down by the customer. Case law deduces that the unused portion of the credit facility does not yet belong to the debtor and is therefore exempt from seizure by his creditors (Civ. 2e, 18 November 2004, no. 00-19.693).
Property not used by the sole trader for business purposes
Protecting sole traders is a constant concern for legislators, who seek to encourage economic initiative by limiting personal risks. A number of mechanisms have been created to separate business assets, which are exposed to the company's debts, from personal assets. These mechanisms are crucial for entrepreneurs, who have to manage their debts and, if necessary, find solutions such as negotiating a loan. payment terms with creditors without risking losing everything.
In addition to unseizability of the principal residenceThe law also allows entrepreneurs to protect their other personal property assets. Article L. 526-1 of the Commercial Code allows any sole trader to declare his rights in "any property, whether built or not, that he has not used for his business" to be exempt from seizure. This could be a second home, a plot of land or a rental flat. Unlike a principal residence, this protection requires an active approach: a declaration must be made before a notary and published in the land registry. This declaration only protects the entrepreneur against professional creditors whose claims arise after the publication.
Declaration of the allocation of the assets of the sole trader with limited liability (EIRL)
Although the status of limited liability sole trader (EIRL) has been replaced by a single status for sole traders since 2022, it marked an important step forward and its effects will continue to be felt by those who adopted it. It allowed the entrepreneur's assets and liabilities to be split up. By means of a simple declaration, the entrepreneur could assign a set of assets required for his professional activity to a "special-purpose asset".
Article L. 526-12 of the French Commercial Code drew the consequences of this separation. Business creditors could only pursue recovery against the assets allocated to the business. Conversely, personal creditors (those whose debt is unrelated to the business activity) could only seize unaffected personal assets. This system created a virtually watertight partition between the two assets, offering a high degree of legal certainty, provided the entrepreneur did not commit any fraud or serious breach of reporting obligations, in which case he would once again be liable for all his assets.
Articulation and limits of the rules of inalienability
Inalienability regimes, whether legal or voluntary, are not absolute. Their implementation raises practical questions about their effectiveness against creditors and possible remedies. Both debtors and creditors need to be aware of the subtleties in order to defend their rights.
Enforceability against creditors and legal remedies
For inalienability to be effective, it must be enforceable against creditors, i.e. they must respect it. This enforceability often depends on publication formalities. For example, an inalienability clause in a real estate donation must be published at the land registry office so that everyone is aware of it. The same applies to a declaration that a sole trader's property is exempt from seizure.
Creditors are not totally helpless when faced with an inalienability clause that seems unjustified. If the clause in a gift does not meet the conditions of temporality or serious and legitimate interest, its nullity may be invoked. In addition, as we have seen, the judge may authorise the seizure of property declared inalienable by a donor if the claim arose after the deed and if the circumstances justify it. The creditor must then bring a specific legal action to obtain this authorisation, demonstrating that maintaining the inalienability would cause undue prejudice.
Practical consequences for debtors and creditors
For the debtor, inalienability is a major protection. It enables them to keep essential assets, whether for their family life, their professional activity or because they have been passed on to them with this charge. However, this protection comes at a cost: the debtor cannot freely dispose of the property. They cannot sell it or mortgage it to obtain credit. If they wish to do so, they must obtain the release of the clause, either by the agreement of the person who stipulated it, or by judicial authorisation if the interest that justified it has disappeared.
For the creditor, the existence of an inalienable asset in the debtor's estate reduces his right of general pledge. Before taking legal action, it is therefore essential to check the legal status of the debtor's assets, in particular by analysing the information held by the land registry. A creditor who ignores an inalienability clause and initiates property seizure proceedings will see his proceedings cancelled, wasting time and incurring unnecessary costs.
The complexity of these rules and the way they relate to other debtor protection measures often make the involvement of a lawyer essential. When it comes to securing a transfer, analysing the validity of an inalienability clause or challenging a seizure order, the assistance of a professional can help you navigate these technical legal waters. For a complete analysis of your situation and to assert your rights, it is advisable to consult a lawyer with expertise in enforcement.
Sources
- Civil Code
- Commercial code
- Code of civil enforcement procedures
EN 
FR