{"id":813287,"date":"2026-05-02T04:59:10","date_gmt":"2026-05-02T02:59:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/"},"modified":"2026-05-02T04:59:10","modified_gmt":"2026-05-02T02:59:10","slug":"cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/","title":{"rendered":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 4 ao\u00fbt 2017, 966\/12-CO n\u00b0 537 – Terrain domanial"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

Mati\u00e8res : Foncier<\/p>\n

Mots cl\u00e9s : LITIGE DE TERRAIN \u2013 TERRAIN DOMANIAL \u2013 DEMANDE EXPULSION \u2013DEMANDE ACQUISITION EN COURS DEVANT AUTORITE ADMINISTRATIVE \u2013 INCOMPETENCE JURIDICTION JUDICIAIRE<\/p>\n

La Cour d\u2019appel n\u2019a pas retenu sa comp\u00e9tence sur une demande d\u2019expulsion se rapportant \u00e0 un terrain domanial alors qu\u2019une demande d\u2019acquisition est en cours et dont l\u2019appr\u00e9ciation de l\u2019attribution et du refus rel\u00e8ve de l\u2019autorit\u00e9 administrative.<\/p>\n

Cassation : Ordinaire<\/p>\n

Nature : Civile<\/p>\n

Solution : Rejet<\/p>\n

ARRET N\u00b0 537 du 4 ao\u00fbt 2017<\/p>\n

Dossier :966\/12-CO<\/p>\n

LITIGE DE TERRAIN \u2013 TERRAIN DOMANIAL \u2013 DEMANDE EXPULSION \u2013DEMANDE ACQUISITION EN COURS DEVANT AUTORITE ADMINISTRATIVE \u2013 INCOMPETENCE JURIDICTION JUDICIAIRE<\/p>\n

\u00ab La Cour d\u2019appel n\u2019a pas retenu sa comp\u00e9tence sur une demande d\u2019expulsion se rapportant \u00e0 un terrain domanial alors qu\u2019une demande d\u2019acquisition est en cours et dont l\u2019appr\u00e9ciation de l\u2019attribution et du refus rel\u00e8ve de l\u2019autorit\u00e9 administrative \u00bb.<\/p>\n

REPUBLIQUE DE MADAGASCAR<\/p>\n

COUR DE CASSATION<\/p>\n

CHAMBRE CIVILE COMMERCIALE SOCIALE<\/p>\n

La Cour de Cassation, Chambre Civile Commerciale Sociale en son audience publique ordinaire du vendredi quatre ao\u00fbt deux mille dix-sept, tenue au Palais de Justice \u00e0 Anosy, a rendu l'arr\u00eat dont la teneur suit :<\/p>\n

Apr\u00e8s en avoir d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9 conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 la loi :<\/p>\n

Statuant sur le pourvoi de R.L, demeurant \u00e0 [Adresse 1], ayant pour conseil Ma\u00eetre Louis SAGOT, avocat, contre l'arr\u00eat n\u00b0 303 du 03 octobre 2012 de la Chambre Civile de la Cour d'Appel de Fianarantsoa, rendu dans le litige les opposant \u00e0 R.J et consorts ;<\/p>\n

Vu le m\u00e9moire en demande ;<\/p>\n

Sur le moyen unique de cassation pris de la violation de l'article 180 du Code de Proc\u00e9dure Civile, pour d\u00e9naturation des faits et de l'objet de la proc\u00e9dure, d\u00e9cision rendue ultra et infra petita, non r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 conclusions constat\u00e9es par \u00e9crit, insuffisance ou contradiction de motifs et pris de la violation des articles 11 et 54 du Code de Proc\u00e9dure Civile, en ce que l'arr\u00eat attaqu\u00e9 a affirm\u00e9 que le bien litigieux fait encore l'objet d'une proc\u00e9dure au niveau du " BIRAO IFOTONY NY FANANANTANY " ou BIF de Ranohira, pour d\u00e9clarer irrecevable en l'\u00e9tat toutes les demandes et ce par infirmation de la d\u00e9cision entreprise alors que l'objet de la demande est l'expulsion du terrain des consorts R.J, la cessation de trouble de jouissance et leur condamnation \u00e0 payer des dommages int\u00e9r\u00eats et la demande de Y. intervenant volontaire est la distraction d'une parcelle sur laquelle il aurait construit une maison et plant\u00e9 des arbres fruitiers et surtout qu'aucune des parties ni demandeur ni intervenant volontaire ni d\u00e9fendeurs n'a soulev\u00e9 l'irrecevabilit\u00e9 de toutes les demandes ; et enfin l'arr\u00eat attaqu\u00e9 affirme que la proc\u00e9dure est encore au niveau du BIF en se basant sur les conclusions de R.J ainsi que de la lettre d'opposition du 20 novembre 2009, ce qui est faux car justement en raison de l'opposition faite par les consorts R.J.A, le BIF n'a plus poursuivi la proc\u00e9dure ainsi qu'il r\u00e9sulte de l'attestation du BIF en date du 12 avril 2010 et 26 novembre 2012 ;<\/p>\n

Attendu qu'il ressort des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de la proc\u00e9dure que le terrain litigieux est domanial ;<\/p>\n

Attendu ainsi que c'est \u00e0 bon droit que la Cour d'Appel n'a pas retenu sa comp\u00e9tence sur une demande d'expulsion se rapportant \u00e0 un terrain domanial alors qu'une demande d'acquisition est en cours et dont l'appr\u00e9ciation de l'attribution et du refus rel\u00e8ve de l'autorit\u00e9 administrative et celle-ci n'a pas encore pris sa d\u00e9cision ;<\/p>\n

Attendu qu'en d\u00e9clarant irrecevables en l'\u00e9tat les demandes objet de sa saisine, la Cour d'Appel a bien appliqu\u00e9 la loi ;<\/p>\n

Que le moyen n'est donc pas fond\u00e9 ;<\/p>\n

REJETTE le pourvoi ;<\/p>\n

Condamne le demandeur \u00e0 l'amende et aux d\u00e9pens. <\/p>\n

Ainsi jug\u00e9 et prononc\u00e9 par Cour, Chambre les jour, mois et an que dessus.<\/p>\n

O\u00f9 \u00e9taient pr\u00e9sents :<\/p>\n

Messieurs et Mesdames<\/p>\n

– RAKETAMANGA Odette, Pr\u00e9sident de Chambre, Pr\u00e9sident ;<\/p>\n

– RANDRIAMANANTENA Mauricette, Conseiller – Rapporteur ;<\/p>\n

– RABETOKOTANY Marcelline, Conseiller, RAZAFIMORIA David, Conseiller, TOBSON Emma Augustine, Conseiller, tous membres ;<\/p>\n

– RAKOTONDRASOA Jean Fid\u00e8le, Avocat G\u00e9n\u00e9ral ;<\/p>\n

– RAJAONARISON Herimalala Patricia ;<\/p>\n

La minute du pr\u00e9sent arr\u00eat a \u00e9t\u00e9 sign\u00e9e par le Pr\u00e9sident, le Rapporteur et le Greffier.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Sources officielles :<\/strong> consulter la page source<\/a> · PDF officiel<\/a><\/p>\n

Portail officiel du Ministere de la Justice de Madagascar.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mati\u00e8res : Foncier Mots cl\u00e9s : LITIGE DE TERRAIN \u2013 TERRAIN DOMANIAL \u2013 DEMANDE EXPULSION \u2013DEMANDE ACQUISITION EN COURS DEVANT AUTORITE ADMINISTRATIVE \u2013 INCOMPETENCE JURIDICTION JUDICIAIRE La Cour d\u2019appel n\u2019a pas retenu sa comp\u00e9tence sur une demande d\u2019expulsion se rapportant \u00e0 un terrain domanial alors qu\u2019une demande d\u2019acquisition est en cours et dont l\u2019appr\u00e9ciation de…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":[],"kji_country":[48960],"kji_court":[48961],"kji_chamber":[48962],"kji_year":[52833],"kji_subject":[7625],"kji_keyword":[8424,50720,48966,48968,37033],"kji_language":[7733],"class_list":["post-813287","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-madagascar","kji_court-cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar","kji_chamber-chambre-civile-commerciale-sociale","kji_year-52833","kji_subject-commercial","kji_keyword-cassation","kji_keyword-domanial","kji_keyword-madagascar","kji_keyword-matieres","kji_keyword-terrain","kji_language-francais"],"yoast_head":"\nCour de cassation de Madagascar, 4 ao\u00fbt 2017, 966\/12-CO n\u00b0 537 - Terrain domanial - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 4 ao\u00fbt 2017, 966\/12-CO n\u00b0 537 - Terrain domanial\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Mati\u00e8res : Foncier Mots cl\u00e9s : LITIGE DE TERRAIN \u2013 TERRAIN DOMANIAL \u2013 DEMANDE EXPULSION \u2013DEMANDE ACQUISITION EN COURS DEVANT AUTORITE ADMINISTRATIVE \u2013 INCOMPETENCE JURIDICTION JUDICIAIRE La Cour d\u2019appel n\u2019a pas retenu sa comp\u00e9tence sur une demande d\u2019expulsion se rapportant \u00e0 un terrain domanial alors qu\u2019une demande d\u2019acquisition est en cours et dont l\u2019appr\u00e9ciation de...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\\\/\",\"name\":\"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 4 ao\u00fbt 2017, 966\\\/12-CO n\u00b0 537 - Terrain domanial - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-02T02:59:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/criminal-law-attorneys-in-paris-counsel-and-strategic-defense\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 4 ao\u00fbt 2017, 966\\\/12-CO n\u00b0 537 – Terrain domanial\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp\",\"width\":1000,\"height\":1000,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 4 ao\u00fbt 2017, 966\/12-CO n\u00b0 537 - Terrain domanial - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 4 ao\u00fbt 2017, 966\/12-CO n\u00b0 537 - Terrain domanial","og_description":"Mati\u00e8res : Foncier Mots cl\u00e9s : LITIGE DE TERRAIN \u2013 TERRAIN DOMANIAL \u2013 DEMANDE EXPULSION \u2013DEMANDE ACQUISITION EN COURS DEVANT AUTORITE ADMINISTRATIVE \u2013 INCOMPETENCE JURIDICTION JUDICIAIRE La Cour d\u2019appel n\u2019a pas retenu sa comp\u00e9tence sur une demande d\u2019expulsion se rapportant \u00e0 un terrain domanial alors qu\u2019une demande d\u2019acquisition est en cours et dont l\u2019appr\u00e9ciation de...","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/","name":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 4 ao\u00fbt 2017, 966\/12-CO n\u00b0 537 - Terrain domanial - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-05-02T02:59:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/cour-de-cassation-de-madagascar-4-aout-2017-966-12-co-n-537-terrain-domanial\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/criminal-law-attorneys-in-paris-counsel-and-strategic-defense\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Cour de cassation de Madagascar, 4 ao\u00fbt 2017, 966\/12-CO n\u00b0 537 – Terrain domanial"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp","width":1000,"height":1000,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/813287","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=813287"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=813287"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=813287"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=813287"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=813287"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=813287"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=813287"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=813287"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}