In joint ownership, the person who alone benefits from the undivided property must compensate the others only if they are usufructuaries.
Consequently, the Court of Cassation judged on June 1, a couple who were only bare owners of the marital apartment could not argue about the occupation by only one of them during the divorce proceedings, since neither of them was entitled to the fruits of this building.
The apartment property had been dismembered, the bare ownership having been given to the couple, in joint possession, by the parents of one of the spouses who had retained the usufruct. But even if the couple occupied the apartment, they were the owners without right of use and could only use it according to the decision of the usufructuary parents. The right to enjoy it or to collect the fruits of it belonged only to the parents, donors and usufructuaries, explained the magistrates.
Therefore, the Court of Cassation ruled, the spouse who was allocated this accommodation during the divorce proceedings can only owe occupancy compensation to the usufructuary parents. He owes nothing to the other spouse or to matrimonial joint ownership – formed by himself and his spouse – since they are only bare owners, which does not give the right to receive the income or to claim the useexplained the judges.
In the event of dismemberment, the property is divided into bare ownership on the one hand and usufruct on the other. The bare owner is therefore the owner without right of use. It is the usufructuary who pays the charges, receives the income and uses the property.