In this case, a couple had been approached by a company responsible for marketing a real estate program and had purchased an apartment as a rental property investment. A few years later, the couple considered the investment to have been unfavorable. Believing that they had been misinformed, the couple had sued the direct seller for nullity of the sale for fraud and, in the alternative, had requested compensation for their damage for a breach of their duty to inform and advise.
The nullity of the sale for fraud having been rejected by the court of appeal, the direct seller considered that the couple could not engage their responsibility.
This is refuted by the Court of Cassation (the highest court in the French judiciary), recalling that it is possible to combine the two actions.