Imposition of Extraneous Conditions

In a February 11, 2026 decision, the Court of Cassation, First Civil Chamber, considered the appeal of the President of the Regional Council of Notaries (President) and reversed and remanded the decision of the National Disciplinary Court of Notaries (NDCN) that dismissed the claim of the President of the Regional Council of Notaries. (Court of Cassation (France), First Civil Chamber, February 11, 2026, No. 24‑14.214)

The President initiated disciplinary proceedings against Mr. [K], a notary. He complained that Mr. K was unable to perform his duties and required his resignation under Article 61. The NDCN dismissed the request of the President in 2024 and ruled that his “prolonged absence from his office, due to his physical or mental condition, cannot in itself justify a finding of inability to act unless the public service expected from the office or its normal operation is affected.”

The President argued to this Court that the NDCN’s addition of the legal condition of proof to demonstrate harm to the public service expected does not exist in Article 61 of Decree No. 2022-900 (Decree). Article 61 established that incapacity is determined by a disciplinary body under conditions fixed by Decree. This Court agreed in that Article 61 also provided that prior to an automatic declaration of resignation, the notary must have been “given formal notice to submit their observations.” Thus, the lower court violated Article 61 by adding an extraneous condition (demonstrated dysfunction or harm to the office).

Reversed and quashed. Remanded to differently constituted panel of the NDCN for reconsideration in conformity with the law.

This is a free article from the March/April 2026 edition of Professional Licensing Report (PLR). Subscribe to Professional Licensing Report (PLR) to access the full edition today.