Tacit Acceptance of Works and France's Décennale Warranty

On 10 September 2026, France's Court of Cassation ruled that a court may find that works have been tacitly accepted even when not all contractors involved were made parties to the proceedings — unlike judicial acceptance, which requires an adversarial procedure involving each of them (Cour de cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, 10 September 2026, n° 24-19.593). This ruling concerns French construction law: it decides which contractors can be bound by a given acceptance date, the trigger for the garantie décennale (France's mandatory ten-year structural liability cover for construction professionals).

The essentials

• Judicial acceptance (réception judiciaire) is pronounced by a court under article 1792-6 of the French Civil Code and requires an adversarial procedure involving every contractor concerned.
• Tacit acceptance (réception tacite) results from the unequivocal intent of the project owner to accept the completed work; a court may find it even when some contractors were not parties to the case (Cour de cassation, 3e civ., 10 September 2026, n° 24-19.593).
• The acceptance date — whether judicial, tacit or express — triggers the ten-year garantie décennale under article 1792-4-1 of the Civil Code, as well as the dommages-ouvrage (France's mandatory first-party cover, taken out by the project owner, for rapid repair of structural defects) attached to it.
• A contractor absent from proceedings where tacit acceptance is found can later have that date raised against it in a separate dispute.
• The ruling does not change what the warranties cover — only the procedural conditions under which their start date can be established.

What did the 10 September 2026 ruling decide?

The Court of Cassation overturned a court of appeal that had refused to find any acceptance — and therefore any starting point for the décennale warranty — solely because not all the contractors concerned had been made parties to the case. According to the Court, that reasoning was correct for judicial acceptance, but wrong for tacit acceptance.

The ruling, handed down in a dispute over defects affecting a single-family home, draws a line that is often blurred in practice. Judicial acceptance is an act of the court, issued only after an adversarial procedure: it cannot be pronounced without giving every contractor whose liability is at stake the chance to be heard. Tacit acceptance, by contrast, is not an act of the court but the finding of a fact — the project owner's unequivocal intent to accept the work, usually inferred from taking possession of the building and paying the outstanding balance. A court can establish that intent even where some contractors were not parties to the case, because it is not ruling on their rights but recording a fact.

How do judicial and tacit acceptance differ?

Criterion	Judicial acceptance	Tacit acceptance
Legal basis	Article 1792-6 of the Civil Code	Settled case law (no dedicated article)
Nature	An act of the court, on a party's request	A finding of fact: the project owner's intent
Adversarial procedure required	Yes — every contractor concerned must be made a party	No, not for the finding itself
Evidence relied on	An express court decision	Taking possession, paying the balance, normal use of the building
Binding on a contractor absent from the case	No — the decision cannot be issued without it	Yes — the fact can be found without that contractor being a party

That last line is the core of the practical risk the 10 September 2026 ruling brings into focus.

Why does the acceptance date matter so much for the décennale warranty?

Acceptance, in whatever form, starts the ten-year period of the garantie décennale (article 1792-4-1 of the Civil Code), along with the two-year fitness warranty and the dommages-ouvrage cover attached to it. Before acceptance, ordinary contractual liability applies; after acceptance, the décennale's stricter, claimant-friendly regime takes over.

A dispute over the date — or even the existence — of acceptance therefore has a direct effect on limitation periods: it decides whether a claim is still admissible, and on what legal basis. That is why qualifying acceptance correctly — express, tacit or judicial — is never a side issue in a French construction dispute.

What is the risk for a contractor left out of the proceedings?

The ruling confirms that tacit acceptance can be established in proceedings to which a contractor was not a party. That contractor had no opportunity, in that case, to contest the date — or even the existence — of acceptance. If that date is later raised against it in a separate dispute — for instance to assess whether its décennale cover, capped at the project's overall cost rather than its own contract, still applies to the claim — it will have to contest the date at that later stage, without the benefit of an argument already settled in its favour in the first case.

For a contractor's insurer, this means an acceptance date established in proceedings its policyholder was not party to is not automatically binding on it: it must be examined on its own merits, based on the available facts (possession, payment, use of the building), rather than simply carried over from a ruling made in another case.

What should a project owner or contractor do in practice?

A project owner's priority is to lock in the acceptance date as early as possible — a signed handover report, with any reservations formally recorded — rather than letting the matter default to tacit acceptance, whose proof, if disputed, rests on a body of circumstantial evidence reconstructed after the fact.

For a contractor or subcontractor, the priority runs the other way: when tacit acceptance is invoked against it in proceedings it was not party to, it should verify that it still has the ability to contest that date in whatever dispute concerns it directly, rather than letting the date stand by default — and make sure no gap has opened in its décennale cover in the meantime, given the penalties that apply to building without one.

Frequently asked questions

What is tacit acceptance of completed works under French law?

It is the acceptance that follows, absent a signed handover report, from the project owner's unequivocal intent to accept the work, with or without reservations. It is usually inferred from a body of evidence: taking possession of the building, paying the outstanding balance, and normal, sustained use of the completed work.

Does tacit acceptance carry the same legal weight as express acceptance?

Yes. Once established, tacit acceptance produces the same effects as express or judicial acceptance: it starts the ten-year period of the garantie décennale (article 1792-4-1 of the Civil Code) and transfers custody of the building to the project owner. Only the proof differs, since it rests on circumstantial evidence rather than a signed document.

Can a contractor be bound by a tacit acceptance found in proceedings it was not party to?

The 10 September 2026 ruling confirms that a court can find tacit acceptance without every contractor concerned being made a party to the case. A contractor absent from those proceedings is not bound by that finding as against it: it keeps the right to contest the acceptance date in a later dispute that concerns it directly.

When does the ten-year décennale warranty period start?

It starts on the date of acceptance of the work, whether express, tacit or judicial (article 1792-4-1 of the Civil Code). From that date, the constructor is liable for ten years for damage — including damage caused by a ground defect — that compromises the building's structural soundness or makes it unfit for its intended use.

What happens if a project owner never formalises acceptance with a handover report?

It may have to prove, if the matter reaches a court, that its intent to accept the work was unequivocal — through possession, payment of the balance, or normal use of the building. That proof is possible but less certain than a signed handover report, and it can delay or weaken the determination of when the warranties' ten-year period actually began.

What McLer does

McLer is an insurance brokerage specialised in corporate risk for the road transport and construction sectors. Based in the Paris region, McLer supports French SMEs and mid-sized companies in structuring, negotiating and managing their insurance programmes.

This article describes French law. Unsure when the décennale or dommages-ouvrage warranty period started on a given project? McLer's teams can help you review your current cover, based on your situation.