Validity and Extension of a Building Permit: Securing the Timetable of a Property Scheme

Sales of a housing scheme are slow, the bank postpones the release of funds, a third-party appeal freezes the start of construction: in all three situations, the countdown on the validity of the building permit (permis de construire) keeps running, and an ill-prepared developer may see its permit lapse before the first crane arrives. The lapse (péremption) of a permit is no trivial matter for an investor, because it sometimes wipes out months of studies and requires a new application to be filed, subject this time to a local town plan (plan local d'urbanisme) that may have become more restrictive. This guide sets out the period of validity of a building permit, the extension mechanisms, the effects of an appeal on the timetable, and the practical levers for securing a transaction structure when financing or sales fall behind.

How long is a building permit valid?

The basic rule is in Article R. 424-17 of the French Town Planning Code. A building permit is valid for three years from its notification to the beneficiary or from the date on which the tacit decision arose.

“A building, development or demolition permit lapses if the works are not begun within three years from the notification referred to in Article R. 424-10 (…) or if, after that period, the works are interrupted for a period of more than one year.” (Article R. 424-17 of the French Town Planning Code)

Two separate grounds of lapse therefore coexist, and they are often confused:

• failure to begin the works within three years of the issue of the permit;
• interruption of the works for more than a year, once the site has opened.

This three-year period results from Decree No. 2016-6 of 5 January 2016, which raised the initial period of validity to three years (from two previously) and relaxed the possibilities of extension. For a developer, this three-year base is the foundation of the reverse schedule (rétroplanning), but it is misleading: what counts is not the date the application was filed, nor the date the land purchase was signed, but the notification of the decision.

The starting point of the period

The period runs from notification of the express decision or from the arising of a tacit decision. A tacit permit arises when the processing period expires without a reply from the authority. In a structure where the land purchase is conditional on obtaining a permit free of any appeal, several months may pass between notification and the actual lifting of the conditions precedent. Those months count against the three-year period: hence the importance of dating the start of validity precisely from the outset. The processing time for an application, which determines the date on which a tacit permit arises, is set out in our article on the time taken to obtain a building permit.

Commencement of the works: the notion that locks in the permit

To avoid lapse at the end of three years, the beneficiary must have “begun” the works. This notion is crucial because it determines whether the right to build is kept, and it is the subject of substantial litigation.

The works must be real and significant. The administrative courts take the view that simply staking out the land, putting up a site fence or carrying out a few token works is not enough to stop the permit lapsing. By contrast, large-scale earthworks, laying the foundations or installing the utility networks show an actual start. The judge's logic is consistent: the aim is to check that the beneficiary has a serious intention to build, and is not artificially keeping its permit alive.

In administrative terms, the start of works is evidenced by the declaration of opening of works (déclaration d'ouverture de chantier, DOC), provided for by Article R. 424-16 of the French Town Planning Code, sent to the town hall. The DOC is evidence, but it is not enough on its own: in a dispute, the physical reality of the site prevails over the declaration. A prudent developer therefore keeps concrete evidence of the start (reports drawn up by a bailiff (huissier de justice), work orders to contractors, dated photographs, earthworks invoices).

Interruption of more than a year

Opening the site is not enough if the works are then abandoned. An interruption of more than a year also causes the permit to lapse. This risk is very real in off-plan schemes, where pre-sales stagnate and the developer suspends the site because the reservation rate is too low to release the completion guarantee (garantie financière d'achèvement). Resuming minimal, documented activity before the one-year mark then becomes a management necessity, not a mere formality.

Extension of the building permit: twice, for one year each time

When the timetable slips, extension of the building permit is the first tool for securing it. Article R. 424-21 of the French Town Planning Code allows the period of validity to be extended twice, for one year each time. Combined with the initial three years, this possibility brings the maximum validity to five years.

“The period of validity (…) may be extended twice for a period of one year, at the request of its beneficiary, if the planning requirements and administrative easements of every kind and the planning taxes and contributions applicable to the land have not changed unfavourably in respect of it.” (Article R. 424-21 of the French Town Planning Code)

The central condition deserves an investor's attention: extension is granted only if the planning rules and easements applicable to the land have not changed unfavourably. If a new, more restrictive local town plan (PLU) has been approved in the meantime, if an easement has been created, or if financial contributions have increased to the applicant's detriment, the authority may refuse the extension. This is precisely the scenario feared by a developer whose scheme is dragging on: the longer the project is delayed, the greater the risk of tighter regulation.

Time limits and procedure

The procedure follows a strict formal process set by Article R. 424-22 of the French Town Planning Code. The extension request must be sent to the town hall by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt, or lodged against a receipt, at least two months before the period of validity expires. Missing that deadline means losing the benefit of the extension.

A mechanism favourable to the beneficiary attaches to this request: the extension is granted tacitly if the authority has not notified a decision within two months of receiving the request. Silence therefore amounts to acceptance. It remains prudent, in a financed project, to keep proof of the filing date and, where appropriate, to ask the town hall for a certificate confirming the tacit extension.

A point to watch in phased schemes: the second extension is requested on the same conditions, before the already extended period expires. Two separate deadlines must therefore be anticipated, not one.

A third-party appeal suspends the period of validity

Neighbour litigation is one of the main sources of delay in property schemes, and the legislature has drawn a protective consequence from this. Where an appeal is brought against the permit, the period of validity is suspended until a final court decision is given. In other words, the countdown on validity stops for the whole duration of the proceedings.

This suspension applies both to an appeal before the administrative court directed against the permit and to proceedings before the civil court based on Article L. 480-13 of the French Town Planning Code. In practical terms, a developer whose permit is challenged does not lose any useful time: once the judge has ruled definitively, the clock restarts where it stopped. This rule prevents a claimant from causing the permit to lapse simply by bringing an appeal, before the judge has even ruled.

Two practical points are needed. First, the suspension does not remove the need for vigilance: the suspended period must be reconstructed precisely in order to recalculate the real deadline. Second, a developer may choose to begin works despite an appeal that is not accompanied by a suspension ordered by the judge (an appeal has no automatic suspensive effect), but it then does so at its own risk, since a later annulment of the permit could expose it to demolition or reinstatement. The time limits available to neighbours and the question of suspensive effect are examined in our article on third-party appeals against a building permit.

Transfer of the permit, a tool for evolving structures

In the life of a scheme, the permit holder frequently changes: sale of the land to a project company, entry of a co-developer, restructuring of a SCI (French property holding company) holding the asset. Transferring the permit allows the authorisation to follow without starting again from zero.

The transfer does not change the period of validity: the transferred permit keeps its original expiry date, extensions included. It is a simple change of holder, formalised by a transfer decision issued by the competent authority, provided that the former and the new beneficiary agree and that the new holder shows a title entitling it to build on the land. For an investor joining a funding round after the permit has been issued, this operation is neutral as to the timetable, but it must be audited: the transferee inherits the lapse deadlines and, where applicable, the extensions already used. Checking how many extensions remain available is part of acquisition due diligence.

When the permit has lapsed: the myth of “reinstatement”

A misconception circulates among some project sponsors: a lapsed permit could be “reinstated” by a simple administrative step. That is wrong. Lapse takes effect automatically and definitively. Once the period of validity has expired without the works having begun, or after an interruption of more than a year, the permit is dead and cannot be revived.

There is no procedure for reinstating a lapsed building permit. The only route is to file a new permit application. And that is where the financial risk materialises for the investor: the new file will be assessed against the planning rules in force on the date of the new filing. If the PLU has been revised in a more restrictive direction (lower maximum height, a minimum area of unsealed ground imposed, tougher parking requirements, a social-mix easement), the project originally authorised may no longer be feasible as it stands, or only on worse economic terms.

Two nuances are nevertheless worth knowing. Lapse must rest on objective facts: in case of disagreement, it is for the authority to show that the works were not begun or were interrupted. A beneficiary with solid evidence of an actual start can therefore challenge a decision recording lapse. Moreover, as long as a permit is within its period of validity, an amending building permit remains possible to adjust the project, but it does not, of itself, extend the period of validity of the original authorisation. The amending permit follows the fate of the main permit. The use of an amending permit to cure a defect during litigation is dealt with separately in our article on regularisation of the permit during the proceedings.

Securing the timetable of a property scheme

Managing periods of validity is not left to the last moment: it is organised from the structuring of the scheme. Several reflexes distinguish a secure structure from an exposed one.

Map the deadlines from the moment of issue

The first step is to date the starting point of the three-year period precisely and to enter the key deadlines in the reverse schedule: the deadline for starting works, the window for filing the first extension request (two months before the deadline), then that for the second. In a scheme run by several parties (project owner, bank, notary, sales agent), this shared calendar prevents a deadline from slipping through the net.

Choose between starting works and extending

Where financing or pre-sales delay the launch, two strategies are open to the developer. The first is to start real and significant works before the three years expire in order to lock in the permit, which requires having the funds and accepting the commitment of expenditure. The second is to request an extension to gain a year, betting on stable planning rules. The choice depends on how mature the financing is and on the local regulatory risk. Where a revision of the PLU has been announced, extension becomes a gamble and the actual start of works is the safest route.

Anticipate regulatory risk

Since extension requires that the applicable rules have not changed unfavourably, an investor has an interest in monitoring draft revisions or modifications of the local planning document. Consulting the resolutions of the municipal council or the inter-municipal body, and following public inquiries, makes it possible to anticipate tighter rules and adjust the strategy (starting works early rather than extending).

Secure the evidence of the start

Finally, once works begin, building an evidence file is decisive. A report by a bailiff (huissier de justice) establishing the real scale of the works, work orders, invoices and a dated photographic record are, in the event of a later challenge to lapse, the elements that will make the difference. This documentation costs little in relation to what is at stake: keeping the right to build.

Conclusion

The period of validity of a building permit, three years extendable twice for a year, offers a five-year margin that seems comfortable, but one that is quickly used up in a scheme where financing, sales and litigation add up. The real risk for a developer or investor is not lapse itself: it is the illusion that a lapsed permit could easily be reinstated, when a new file then has to be filed, subject to the planning rules of the day, often less favourable. Extension is never guaranteed since it presupposes stability of the rules applicable to the land, and the actual start of works remains the only way to lock in the right to build definitively.

The recommendation is simple and demanding: build management of the periods of validity into the running of the scheme from the moment the permit is notified, and not when the deadline approaches. Have a reverse schedule drawn up of the lapse dates and extension windows, monitor developments in the PLU, and where there is doubt about whether an extension is feasible, secure the permit by real, documented works before the three years expire.

Frequently asked questions

How long is a building permit valid?

A building permit is valid for three years from its notification, under Article R. 424-17 of the French Town Planning Code. It lapses if the works are not begun within that period, or if they are interrupted for more than a year after they begin. This period can be extended to a maximum of five years by two extensions of one year each.

How many times can a building permit be extended?

A building permit can be extended twice, for one year each time, under Article R. 424-21 of the French Town Planning Code. Each request must be sent to the town hall at least two months before the current period expires. Extension is granted only if the planning rules and easements applicable to the land have not changed unfavourably for the beneficiary.

How do I request an extension of a building permit?

The request is made by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt sent to the town hall, or by lodging it against a receipt, at least two months before the validity deadline (Article R. 424-22 of the French Town Planning Code). If the authority does not reply within two months of receipt, the extension is granted tacitly. It is advisable to keep proof of filing and to ask for written confirmation of the tacit extension.

Does a third-party appeal use up time on the validity of the permit?

No, the opposite happens: where an appeal is brought against the permit before the administrative or civil court, the period of validity provided for by Article R. 424-17 is suspended until a final court decision. The clock restarts at the end of the proceedings. By contrast, a developer that begins works despite an appeal does so at its own risk, since annulment of the permit may lead to reinstatement of the site.

What does “commencement of works” mean for avoiding lapse?

Commencement of works requires real and significant works, such as large-scale earthworks, foundations or installation of utility networks. Simply staking out the land, a site fence or token works are not enough to stop the permit lapsing. The declaration of opening of works (DOC) provided for by Article R. 424-16 of the French Town Planning Code formalises this start, but it is the physical reality of the site that counts in a dispute.

Can a lapsed building permit be reinstated?

No, lapse is final and there is no procedure for reinstating a lapsed permit. The only solution is to file a new permit application, which will be assessed against the planning rules in force on the date of the new filing. If the local town plan has become more restrictive in the meantime, the original project may no longer be feasible on the same terms.

Does transferring a permit change its period of validity?

No, the transfer of a building permit is a simple change of holder that does not alter the validity deadlines or the extensions already used. The new beneficiary inherits the permit with its original lapse date. Before any acquisition, the remaining period and the number of extensions still available must therefore be checked, as part of due diligence.