Skip to content
GAUTELIER AVOCATSConseil & Défense

Real estate · Analysis

Business lawReal estate law

Property sales and fraudulent concealment: proving the hidden information was decisive

Published on · By Maëva Gautelier

A miniature house held in a hand

A seller’s silence can unravel a sale, provided it is proved that the hidden information was decisive for the buyer.

What the seller left unsaid can be enough to reopen a sale. On one condition: proving that it mattered.

The keys were handed over a few months ago. Then the first rains come, and with them a stain on the ceiling that a brand-new silicone joint had hidden during the viewings. Or a neighbour who, from the very first weekend, proves impossible to live next to. Or a letter from the town hall referring to a danger order that no one had mentioned.

The feeling of having been misled is immediate. The legal demonstration is more demanding. In fraudulent concealment, one question decides almost everything: was the hidden information decisive?

Saying nothing can be enough

Fraudulent concealment does not require a lie. The Civil Code also covers the intentional concealment of information which the seller knows is decisive for the buyer (art. 1137 Civil Code). And the mistake so induced is always excusable: the buyer cannot be blamed for failing to discover what was hidden from them (art. 1139 Civil Code).

It still has to have mattered

Not every silence is fraudulent concealment. The information must have been decisive: without it, the buyer would not have bought, or not on those terms (art. 1130 Civil Code). The courts assess this case by case, in light of the buyer’s plans, the nature of the property and what the seller knew.

Courts have upheld claims over foundation works left unmentioned, leaks disguised before viewings, a danger order, or an underground tank. The common point: the information went to the heart of what the buyer thought they were buying.

A question of proof

It is for the buyer to show that the information was owed to them, that it was decisive and that it was deliberately hidden. A demonstration that has to be prepared with care.

Depending on the case, the outcome may be avoidance of the sale or compensation, while keeping the property. And the claim remains open even after the time limit for the latent-defect warranty has expired.

A silence is not pleaded. It is proved.

Let us look at your matter

Whether you are a buyer who believes they were misled or a seller facing a claim, our real estate litigators review your situation and point you to the right strategy.

Arrange a consultation · +33 4 86 91 14 96

References: arts. 1130, 1137 and 1139 Civil Code; Cass. 3e civ., 28 May 2026, no. 24-20.821; Cass. 3e civ., 23 September 2020, no. 19-18.104.

Tell us about your situation

Follow the firm

Find the firm on Instagram, where we publish regularly.