Permit refused: common grounds and how to appeal

A permit refusal is almost never the end: it is a written, reasoned, dated decision that says precisely what is wrong. Reading it well is the first step; choosing between correcting the project and contesting the decision is the second; and respecting the deadlines is the third, because they are short. This guide rests on the general building regulation, which organises the commune’s decision, and on Law 41-90 establishing the administrative courts, which organises the appeal. It extends the guide on the building permit.

What must the refusal decision contain?

The general building regulation provides that after the review committee, minutes record “the individual opinions of the members” (article 34), that the president decides “in the light of the opinions and approvals” (article 35), and that “in the event of refusal of the permit, the president of the communal council is required to give reasons for his decision and to inform the applicant” (article 36). Those reasons are your raw material: they refer to identifiable rules, an article of the zone regulation, a missing document, an unfavourable opinion from a service.

Ask for the committee’s minutes if the refusal letter does not reproduce them. They show which member gave which opinion. An unfavourable opinion from the urban agency weighs more than the others, since article 35 forbids issuing the permit without its concurring opinion; an unfavourable opinion from a network operator can often be lifted with an additional document.

What are the most frequent grounds for refusal?

• Non-compliance with the planning document: zone designation, height, setbacks, coefficients, alignment. These are the elements the planning information note would have shown; the guide on COS and CUS explains how to read them.
• Inadmissible file: article 33 makes inadmissible any file lacking all the principal documents, but forbids rejecting for the absence of an information document. Check which of the two categories the missing item belongs to.
• Insufficient proof of ownership: title, pending registration or contested customary deed, unsettled joint ownership. See Land title vs melkia.
• Unfavourable opinion from a service: civil protection, networks, telecommunications, heritage in a protected zone.
• Burdened land: reservation for a facility, non-buildable zone, perimeter under study, easement.
• Plans not signed by a registered architect where Law 016-89 requires it.

Should you contest or correct?

The general building regulation organises correction itself. Where the committee asks for changes, the president sends the applicant a registered letter within two working days of receiving the minutes, and the issuance deadlines “only start running again from the date the applicant files the amended plans or other documents” (article 37). For simple additional documents or reservations with no effect on the opinions, the designer is given five extra working days (article 38). A refusal based on a clear planning rule will not be annulled by a court: the judge reviews lawfulness, not merits.

An appeal has its place where the decision is tainted by what article 20 of Law 41-90 calls excess of power: “lack of competence of the authority that took it”, “defect of form”, “misuse of power”, “lack of reasons” or “violation of the law”. An unreasoned refusal, a refusal based on a planning document that is not enforceable, or a refusal for the absence of an information document are typical examples.

How do the informal and hierarchical appeals work?

Article 23 of Law 41-90 gives interested parties “the option, before the expiry of the period” of sixty days, “to lodge with the author of the decision an informal appeal or to bring before the higher administrative authority a hierarchical appeal”. This prior appeal has two effects. It opens a chance of reconsideration without litigation: the president may reverse the decision, notably if you bring a document or a reading of the regulation he did not have. And it moves the starting point of the court deadline: “the appeal to the administrative court may validly be brought within sixty days from notification of the express decision rejecting, in whole or in part, the prior administrative appeal”.

Silence kept “for more than 60 days by the administrative authority on the informal or hierarchical appeal counts as rejection”. The appeal is therefore made in writing, against a receipt or by registered letter, citing the contested decision, the reasons it invokes and why they are unfounded, with supporting documents. Keep proof of its filing: article 21 requires, for the later court petition, “a copy of the decision rejecting that appeal or, in case of implied rejection, a document proving its filing”.

How do you bring the case before the administrative court?

The administrative courts are competent “to hear, at first instance, actions for annulment on grounds of excess of power brought against decisions of administrative authorities” (article 8). The court “is seised by a written petition signed by a lawyer registered with one of the bars of Morocco” (article 3); the registry issues a receipt. Article 10 lets you choose the court of the applicant’s domicile or the one in whose area the decision was taken. The petition must be accompanied by a copy of the contested decision (article 21) and “is exempt from payment of the court fee” (article 22).

1. Date the notification. The sixty days run “from publication or notification to the interested party of the contested decision” (article 23). Keep the acknowledgement of receipt.
2. Choose the route. Informal or hierarchical appeal within sixty days, or direct petition to the court.
3. Gather the documents. Refusal decision, committee minutes, planning note, the file as filed, proof of the prior appeal where relevant.
4. File the petition through a lawyer. At the registry of the competent administrative court, against a receipt (article 3).
5. Ask for a stay if needed. On express request, the court “may, exceptionally, order a stay of execution” of the decision (article 24).
6. Follow the proceedings. A reporting judge is appointed; the case is heard in public by three judges after the royal commissioner’s submissions (articles 4 and 5).

The judgment may be appealed. Law 41-90 provided for appeal before the administrative chamber of the Supreme Court (article 45); administrative courts of appeal have since been established by Law 80-03, and appeals now go before them.

What if the commune does not answer at all?

Two texts complement each other. The general building regulation makes the one-stop shop the contact bound to inform you of “the progress of permit applications under review” (article 12), and charges the governors with ensuring deadlines are met, urging laggards “to comply with the laws and regulations in force, within a period they set” and taking “the measures required where the delay persists” (article 49). A letter to the prefecture or province, recalling the filing dates and the regulation’s deadlines, is therefore the first lever.

Law 41-90 adds the litigation route: “silence kept for a period of 60 days by the administration following a request it has received is equivalent, unless the law provides otherwise, to a rejection. The interested party may then bring an action before the administrative court within 60 days from the expiry of the 60-day period specified above” (article 23). In other words, after sixty days of silence a sixty-day window opens to act.

What happens after an annulment?

The action for annulment is a review of lawfulness. If the court upholds the petition, the refusal decision disappears, and the commune must decide again on the application taking account of the judgment’s reasons; it cannot rely on the same ground found unlawful. If the refusal was justified by another rule not examined, a new, properly reasoned refusal remains possible. That is why correcting the project, where the ground is well founded, is almost always shorter than litigation.