The Court of Cassation's ruling was based on Art.  2182 of the French Civil Codeit and 501 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

1.

Adolphe de ... died on 10 February 1885 without leaving any heirs to his will. By authenticated will dated 9 June 1880, he made Alphonse de Y... de Bréon his universal legatee. And made particular legacies, notably to the consorts of Z...;

De Bréon took possession of the estate and delivered the bequests;

In 1886, Edouard de X..., the deceased's brother, relied on two holograph wills dated 13 and 14 January 1885. These revoked the will of 9 June 1880;  

As the writing of these wills had been overlooked, proceedings were instituted between :

-. Edouard de X..., of the one part, Y... de Bréon

-the consorts of Z..., of the other part ;

It was brought to an end by a ruling of the Angers Court of Appeal on 9 June 1890, which declared that :

-the said wills were in the hand of Adolphe de X...

-and that the latter's estate belonged to his brother Edward.

On 24 May 1892, the Court of Assizes of the Seine ruled :

-declared the wills dated 13 and 14 January 1885 to be false,

-and found Guyard, notary at Bourg-d'Iré, guilty of having had them made;

On the following 3 August, the Court of Angers therefore reversed its decision of 9.06.1890.

Lastly, on 9 January 1893, it: placed Y... de Bréon and the consorts of Z... in possession of the property belonging to the estate of Adolphe de X... and ordered Edouard de X... to return it to them.

2.

The judgment under appeal also found that on 24 March and 31 March 1891 Edouard de X... had sold to A... and co, the plaintiffs in the appeal, various items of property belonging to the estate of his brother Adolphe and included in the special legacy made to the consorts de Z... by the authenticated will.

Lastly, it finds that the purchasers acted in good faith when dealing under the influence of an error resulting from res judicata.

It nevertheless ordered them to return to the consorts of Z... the properties that the latter had claimed. 

The authenticated will therefore deprived Edouard de X... of the legal seisin of his brother's estate.

The judgment of 9 June 1890, which had declared this will revoked, was itself revoked.

Edouard de X... was therefore merely a usurper of the said estate. He was not entitled to consent to a disposal that infringed the heirs' right of ownership.

3.

But, in law, the considerations of public policy and the general interest which have led to the recognition of the validity of sales made between the apparent heir and third parties in good faith do not allow it to be made subject to the conditions under which the person who is regarded by all as the successor of the deceased took possession of the succession or to the conditions under which he was dispossessed of it;

It is therefore irrelevant from the point of view of third parties that :

-the heir apparent appears to hold his title by law or by the will of the deceased.

-he has come into possession of the hereditary property without contradiction or a court decision, having acquired the authority of res judicata, has declared him the owner thereof.

-Nor does it matter whether a crime was committed by the apparent heir or by a third party without his knowledge. As in this case, a crime which enabled him to pass as heir.

-nor that the judgment recognising him as such has been revoked.

 

Solution adopted by the Cour de cassation (Will and sale) :

 

The common and invincible error and the good faith of third parties are therefore established. Disposals made by the apparent heir are therefore immune from any action for rescission brought by the true heir.

This is a necessary exception both to the general rule laid down in art. 2182 of the Civil Code and to the specific effects of the administration of the civil claim determined by art. 501 of the (old) Code of Civil Procedure.

Thus, in ordering A... and joints, whose good faith and error it found, to return to the consorts of Z... the property that had been sold to them by Edouard de X..., the judgment under appeal falsely applied and, consequently, violated the articles referred to above.

Will and sale