He installs a camera in his garden … but his neighbors dragging him to justice

To secure his house, an owner had installed a camera oriented towards a path shared with his neighbors. The latter did not appreciate being filmed … and brought the business. The Court of Cassation has just decided.

• 
  

  To safeguard
  

  
  
  

  Saved
  

History does not say if Mr. D is paranoid or if he has good reasons to worry about the attendance of the surroundings of his house. The fact remains that he had a property installed a video surveillance camera,, “Oriented in the direction of a path of servitude»» Borrowed by himself and his four neighbors, we read in a decision of the Court of Cassation rendered on April 10, 2025, and spotted by the law firm Adonis.

The neighbors of Monsieur D have little tasted to see their comings and goings filmed day and night. So they have seized justice In order to obtain the removal of the video surveillance camera. A request rejected in the court of appeal, due to “The absence of evidence of a concrete damage to privacy”explains Adonis.

Real estate investment: Soon zero capital gains tax after 10 years of detention?

Not necessary to prove a malicious use of video surveillance

Refusing to stop there, the neighbors of Monsieur D appeared in a cassation. Well took them because the Court of Cassation censored the decision of the Court of Appeal. “To reject the request for the removal of the video-surveillance camera installed by Mr. D, the judgment (of the Court of Appeal) retains that this device covering only a common way to the vicinity, it is not demonstrated (…) the existence (…) of an attack on private life”recalls the Court of Cassation in its decision.

“By ruling thus, when she had found that the camera allowed the capture of the image of people taking the litigious path, the court of appeal (…) has violated” L’Article 9 of the Civil Codeaccording to which everyone has the right to respect for their privacy, believes the Court of Cassation. According to the highest jurisdiction, “The simple fact of filming a space borrowed by third parties is sufficient to constitute an illicit attack, without it being necessary to demonstrate an abusive or malicious use of images. In other words, the only recording of images of people on a common path is a violation of their privacy, even if it is a shared or not closed space “decrypts Adonis.

Social housing: surveillance cameras soon compulsory in low -cost housing?

Strengthening the protection of individual freedoms

According to lawyers, this decision of the Court of Cassation “A important legal consequences for individuals “. It indeed shows that the installation of a camera filming a common path or a servitude “Without the explicit agreement of users constitutes an attack on privacy”. Another teaching of this decision, “Such an installation can be deemed illicit even without diffusion of images or proof of damage”.

Finally, the victims can request the withdrawal of the system “On the basis of the manifestly illegal disorder», Based on article 9 of the Civil Code. “”The recent jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation therefore strengthens the protection of individual freedoms, Including shared areas like the paths of servitude “concludes the law firm.