Hi ! I have no definitive answer but i can give you some infos there
In french, the word “tendre” translates well to “to tend”, as both describe something that is preferred but not mandatory or necessary.
In this context, it seems indeed a bit strange. But, from the basic and general knowledge I have of french laws, “tendre” is not a specific word of the legal jargon, so I think the meaning implied here is the common meaning, which is quite the same as “to tend”. Someone with better knowledge of the french legal jargon could rectify me though.
From what i studied of french laws, public service is considered very important, and can lead to arbitrary infringements of private and personal property (like building roads or railways, it is mandatory to compensate owners of properties affected, but not really to have their consent). So “tends” could be the real meaning here, like “it’s better if you can get owner’s consent, but as you are building a service for everyone to use, you can do it without owner’s consent”.
It’s been some years since I learned all of this, so I might be wrong or it might be outdated.
Thanks for the insight; that’s quite helpful.
The concept of easements still exists in this area but it seems like easements are not being used for façades, which kind of makes sense. The dispute I’m getting into is over a telecom company that is not serving the whole public. They are discriminatory and exclusive. I consider it an injustice that they can arbitrarily drill into people’s houses to support a “public” service which they then exclude some people from access (including owners of the homes they are drilling). Property owners then have a burden of paying €10 per cable to give notice by registered letter to all telecoms using their façade whenever a homeowner wants to perform work on their own façade.
That’s why I am looking closely at this law. I found nothing in the law that requires telecoms to be inclusive.
Well, from what i learned too, this notion of public service is quite discussed as cases such as yours might arise when we have a mix of public service and private companies.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the law was unclear and that you are encountering one of many french laws’ grey area, where no one really knows what the exact procedure is.
Good luck anyway, hope you’ll find precise info from someone with better knowledge of this specific domain
it’s better if you can get owner’s consent, but as you are building a service for everyone to use, you can do it without owner’s consent
That’s how I understood too.
‘Tendre à’ whose conjugate form is used here means to do its best at something or do a thing that is close enough to be assimilated to something. My understanding of this text is that the company must seek an agreement but it as no obligation to have an agreement at the end of the negotiation.
I’m not a specialist of legal jargon but the use of ‘tendre à’ in this context surprise me. It does not fit the formal register use in legal document. Or maybe there is some legal or formal use of ‘tendre à’ that is outside of my knowledge.
Welcome! Copy pasting the content so that people can answer here
I would like to understand this paragraph:
§ 2. Lorsque (un opérateur d’un [¹ réseau public de communications électroniques]¹) a l’intention d’établir des câbles, lignes aériennes et équipements connexes, de les enlever ou d’y exécuter des travaux, elle tend à rechercher un accord quant à l’endroit et la méthode d’exécution des travaux, avec la personne dont la propriété sert d’appui, est franchie ou traversée.
Argos Translate yields:
§ 2. When (an operator of a [¹ public electronic communications network]¹) intends to establish cables, airlines and related equipment, to remove or perform work therein, it tends to seek an agreement on the location and method of carrying out work, with the person whose property serves as a support, is crossed or crossed.
I think tends is a false friend here because it seems unlikely in this context. A commercial machine translation yields:
§ 2. When (an operator of a [¹ public electronic communications network]¹) intends to establish, remove or carry out work on cables, overhead lines and related equipment, it shall seek agreement as to the location and method of carrying out the work with the person whose property is used as support, is crossed or is being traversed.
Sounds more accurate. But I’m a bit annoyed that there seems to be no requirement that the telecom company obtain consent from property owners. Is that correct? The telecom operator does not need consent on whether to use someone’s private property, only consent on how they deploy the cables?
