LAW CASL. The decree of February 27, 2017 establishing the Permit to construct, from the law of CASL, will not pass in front of the constitutional Council. So just decide the State Council. This text had been attacked by the Order of the land surveyors-experts (OGE).
The State Council has decided : the decree to establish a threshold for the mandatory use of an architect for subdivisions, set to 2.500m2 (the “permits to construct”), will not be the subject of a priority question of constitutionality to the constitutional Council. As decided by the Council of State, to July 21, 2017. The Order of the land surveyors-experts (OGE) had attacked the text, after its publication last February. But it was defended in particular by the national Council of the order of architects.
According to the OGE, this obligation is in violation of the freedom of entrepreneurship and the principle of equality before the law. What the State Board responds that it is “permissible for the legislator to provide the freedom to take […] of the limitations associated with constitutional requirements or justified by the general interest”. The institution also argues that the obligation to use an architect does not exclude “the competition of other planning professionals, urban planning and landscapes, among which the land surveyors-experts, and the constitution of the dossier of application for a licence to build”. It follows from these observations that “the question raised does not present a serious character” and, therefore, it does not merit to be brought before the constitutional Council in the context of a QPC. The end of a fight, which brought together, for months on end, arhcitectes and the land surveyors-experts.
The State Board also validates the threshold of 150m2
Based on the same type of arguments, the judges of the Council of State have decided in the same direction for another decree from the law of CASL. It is the decree to establish a threshold for the mandatory use of an architect of 150m2 for the buildings (excluding farm buildings). The query was put by the national Union of architecture and masters of work (Unamo). The Council of State considered that the request was not of a serious nature, and that, accordingly, the text could not be the subject of a QPC to the constitutional Council.