Shufaa and Pre-emption Rights in Morocco

Shufaa (chefaâ) is a statutory pre-emption right. When a co-owner of an undivided property sells their share to an outsider, an eligible co-owner may step into the buyer's place and take that share, by paying the same price and the required costs, within strict time limits. It exists to let co-owners keep a stranger out of their indivision.

It is a narrow right, not a general one. Not every sale triggers it, and not every person with an interest in the property has it: shufaa belongs to qualifying co-owners in indivision, on the conditions the law sets, and it is lost quickly if the deadlines pass or the price is not properly tendered.

This guide is national and procedural, and it is informational and general rather than advice on a specific file. It does not imply that AvocAffaire acts for any party.

Under article 292 of the Code of Real Rights (Law 39-08), shufaa is the taking, by a co-owner in an undivided property or in an undivided real right, of the share their co-owner has sold — at its price, after paying that price, the necessary costs of the contract, and the useful and necessary expenses where appropriate. The pre-emptor does not undo the sale so much as replace the buyer in it.

Shufaa has deep roots in Moroccan legal tradition and classical jurisprudence, but the rules that apply today are those of the current Code of Real Rights. This guide states the current statutory position; the historical origin is context, not the governing law.

Article 293 sets four conditions for a valid shufaa claim, and all of them must be met. The claimant must be a co-owner in the undivided property at the time their co-owner's share in the property or real right is sold; their acquisition of the undivided part must predate the date on which the person against whom shufaa is sought acquired the share in question; they must hold their own share by legal or actual possession; and the share must have been acquired by that person for value.

Read together, these conditions confine shufaa to genuine, prior co-owners. It is not a right of neighbours, and it is not automatically a right of every heir or every person who claims some connection to the property. Where the claimant does not meet all four conditions, the claim fails at the threshold, whatever the merits otherwise.

The relationship that grounds shufaa is indivision — co-ownership of an undivided share, where each co-owner holds a proportion of the whole rather than a defined physical part. The right runs on the same undivided property or the same undivided real right that is being sold, not on a loosely related interest.

Timing matters. Article 293 requires the claimant to be a co-owner at the moment of the sale and to have held their undivided part before the person they are pre-empting acquired theirs. Article 294 adds that certain real rights — the right of elevation joined to ownership of the lower part, or the surface or usufruct-style right joined to bare ownership — can themselves be reached by shufaa where they are sold to an outsider, which shows that the right attaches to defined real-property relationships rather than to any co-ownership in a general sense.

A common misunderstanding is that owners in the same building share a pre-emption right over each other's apartments. As a rule they do not: in condominium ownership each lot is separate private property, and sharing the building's common parts does not, by itself, make the other owners co-owners of any given apartment for shufaa purposes.

Shufaa can still arise inside a building where a specific lot or share is genuinely held in indivision between particular people — for example, one apartment inherited by several heirs who have not divided it. The question is always whether there is a real undivided share in the thing being sold, not whether the parties happen to own in the same building.

Shufaa responds to a sale — a transfer of the undivided share for value (article 292). Whether a particular transfer qualifies is a question to check against the statute, not to assume, because the Code treats different transfers differently and expressly excludes some.

A sale of an undivided share to an outsider is the core case. A sale to another co-owner is also reached, with the buying co-owner keeping the portion that matches their own share (article 296). A share sold at a lawful public auction cannot be pre-empted (article 302). A genuine gift, a share given as dowry (sadaq) or in a khul' settlement is outside shufaa — unless the supposed gift is a simulated or fraudulent sale (article 303). Exchanges and contributions to a company are not squarely within the statutory language of a sale for value and need to be assessed carefully rather than assumed to trigger the right.

The situation shufaa is built for is a co-owner selling their own undivided share to a third party. Because the buyer would become a stranger inside the indivision, the law lets an eligible co-owner take that share instead, on the same terms.

This is different from selling the whole property, and different again from dividing it. Selling a share transfers one person's proportion; a partition ends the indivision altogether by splitting the property or selling it and sharing the money. Shufaa is the answer to the first situation, not the second, and the two should not be run together when analysing a file.

Shufaa is exercised over the whole of the qualifying sold share: the pre-emptor takes all of it or leaves it (article 296). Where several undivided shares, or a share and parts of it, are sold together in a single contract, the co-owner who wants to pre-empt must take everything sold between them and the seller, or leave it all; the right cannot be split unless the buyer agrees (article 300).

The rule is different when parts of a share have been sold under separate contracts. Article 301 then lets the pre-emptor choose — to take all of them, or to pre-empt under whichever contract they wish, with any earlier buyer entering the claim alongside them. The practical point is that the shape of the sale documents, not just the property, decides how the right can be exercised.

Where more than one co-owner is eligible, each takes shufaa in proportion to their share in the undivided property as at the day of the claim; if some decline, a co-owner who still wants the share must take all of it (article 296). Where the buyer is himself a co-owner, each of the others may take from him in proportion to their share, leaving him the portion that matches his own, unless he chooses to give that up.

Article 297 sets an order of priority where the claimants do not rank equally: a co-owner who shares the seller's same inheritance portion comes first; if he does not take, the right passes to the other heirs, then to the legatees, then to strangers. Each of these ranks enters with the one after it but not the other way round. Because the order is statutory, it should not be replaced with an assumption of simple equality when several people claim.

If the share that may be pre-empted is sold more than once before the shufaa deadline runs out, the pre-emptor may take it from any of the buyers, at the price that buyer paid, and the later sales fall away as a result (article 299). This stops a quick resale from defeating the right.

For registered property there is an important qualification in the same article: the pre-empted share is taken only from the buyer who is registered on the land title. The register, not an unrecorded side agreement, fixes who the pre-emptor proceeds against.

Article 302 is a firm boundary: where an undivided share is sold at public auction under the procedures laid down by law, it cannot be taken by shufaa. A sale conducted through the auction process is treated differently from an ordinary private sale of a share.

This matters for the relationship with partition. When a co-owned property that cannot be divided in kind is liquidated, it is sold by auction, and that auction sale is outside shufaa. The mechanism for ending the co-ownership in that situation is judicial partition, not pre-emption.

There is no shufaa over a share that is genuinely given away, nor over a share provided as dowry (sadaq) or in a khul' arrangement (article 303). A true gratuitous transfer is not a sale, and shufaa answers sales.

The exception is the simulated or fraudulent transfer: where an apparent gift is in reality a sale dressed up to defeat pre-emption, article 303 preserves the right. That is a question of proof, and a demanding one; it does not follow from the mere fact that a transfer is between relatives. Establishing simulation requires evidence, not suspicion.

Whether the property is registered shapes the whole analysis. For titled property, the claimant must prove that the sale has been registered on the land title (article 295), the share is taken from the buyer entered on that title (article 299), and the deadline runs, absent notice, from the registration. This is distinct from an opposition to land registration, which concerns a title that does not yet exist rather than the sale of a share in a settled co-ownership.

For property still going through registration, shufaa is only considered if the pre-emptor lodges their opposition within the relevant registration application (article 305). For unregistered land, proof of ownership, of the share and of the sale rests on deeds and possession, the deadline runs from knowledge of the sale, and — since the 2024 amendment to article 310 — dispositions made by the person holding the pre-empted share are void where the property is unregistered. Identifying the property's status is therefore the first practical step.

The clock in a shufaa case is started by one of two things: a formal notice, or knowledge of the sale. Under article 304 the buyer, once their rights are registered on the title or deposited in the registration application, may serve a copy of the purchase contract on the person entitled to shufaa. That notice is only valid if it is received personally by the right-holder, and it must state — on pain of nullity — the identity of the seller and buyer, the sold share, its price, the expenses, and the land-title or registration-application number or the references of the transfer contract.

Where no such notice is given, the law falls back on registration, deposit or knowledge as the trigger, depending on the property's status. Because the two routes carry different periods, it is important to keep notice and knowledge apart rather than treating them as one event.

The deadlines in article 304 are short and unforgiving. Where a compliant notice has been personally received, the right lapses if it is not exercised within thirty full days of receipt. Where there has been no such notice, the right lapses in all cases: after one full year from registration for titled property, or from deposit for property in the course of registration; after one year from knowledge of the sale for unregistered property; and, where knowledge of the sale is not established, after four years from the date the contract was concluded.

These periods are forfeitures — the right simply expires — rather than ordinary limitation periods, so they are not treated the way an ordinary prescription would be. In practice the safe assumption is that the shortest applicable period governs, and that the moment of personal notice or of proven knowledge should be pinned down early, because everything else in the case depends on being inside the deadline.

Shufaa is exercised at the sale price, not a price the pre-emptor prefers. Article 292 requires the pre-emptor to pay the price and the necessary costs of the contract, together with the useful and necessary expenses where appropriate. There is no statutory discount for pre-empting and no invented surcharge.

The payment is not a promise but an act. Article 306 requires the pre-emptor to make a genuine tender of the price and the apparent contract expenses and, if the other side refuses the genuine tender, to deposit them in the court fund. Doing this within the legal deadline is part of exercising the right; failing to do so forfeits it.

A shufaa claim is made to the president of the competent Court of First Instance (article 306). The pre-emptor expresses the wish to take by shufaa and asks for leave to tender the price and the apparent costs as a genuine tender, then to deposit them in the court fund if the other side refuses — all within the legal deadline, failing which the right is lost.

The forum follows the property, not the parties. The fact that the co-owners are heirs does not send the matter to the family court, and the involvement of a company does not send it to the commercial court; the shufaa claim keeps its own route. Where the property is still being registered, the article 305 opposition in the registration file has to be lodged as well.

A shufaa case is built around three roles: the co-owner claiming the right, the seller, and the person against whom shufaa is sought — the buyer who currently holds the sold share. For registered property that buyer is the one entered on the title (article 299).

The picture grows more complex where there are several sellers, several buyers, or several eligible co-owners, and where shares have moved through more than one contract. The articles on multiple pre-emptors, bundled sales and successive sales (articles 296 to 301) determine who must be brought in and in what capacity, so the parties should be mapped against those rules before the claim is filed.

It helps to separate what the statute requires from what practice makes advisable. The statute requires proof of the sale of the share sought and, for registered property, proof that the sale is registered on the title (article 295); it requires the claimant to meet the four conditions of article 293; and it requires the genuine tender or deposit of article 306.

Around those requirements sit the practical documents that make a claim stand up: the land-title extract or the deeds and evidence of possession for unregistered land, the sale contract and its price, proof of the claimant's own share and its anteriority, and evidence of the date of notice or of knowledge that fixes the deadline. Gathering these early is what allows the tight time limits to be met.

Where shufaa is agreed or ordered by the court, the pre-emptor acquires the sold share, subject to the land-registration rules of the 1913 Dahir (article 307). In substance the pre-emptor takes the buyer's place in respect of that share; for registered property the register is then corrected so that the pre-emptor's entry replaces the buyer's.

Two further points follow from the Code. The person who held the share is not obliged to hand back its fruits before the shufaa claim is made — the fruits are owed only from the date of the claim (article 309). And since the 2024 amendment to article 310, dispositions made by the holder of the pre-empted share are void where the property is unregistered, which protects the pre-emptor against dealings done in the meantime.

If the person holding the share has built on it or planted it from their own funds, article 308 divides the treatment by timing. Work done before the pre-emptor declared the wish to take by shufaa is dealt with under the rules on building or planting on another's land with permission or under a colour of title; work done after that declaration is dealt with under the rules on building or planting without permission, which are less favourable to the person who did it.

The fruits follow the rule already noted: they are returned only from the date the shufaa is claimed (article 309). Beyond these provisions the Code does not create a general rent or reimbursement formula, and none should be assumed.

The right can be given up or lost. Under article 311 it lapses if the pre-emptor expressly waives it — but only where the waiver is made after the right has arisen; if they buy the sold share from its buyer, or divide it with him; or if they sell the very share on which their pre-emption rests, even without knowing that their co-owner had already sold.

Death does not extinguish the right. Article 312 provides that shufaa passes to the pre-emptor's heirs on the same conditions, including whatever remains of the deadline. That transmission is a feature of the pre-emption right itself and is separate from the wider rules on how an estate is inherited.

Shufaa and partition answer different problems. Shufaa responds to the sale of an undivided share, letting a co-owner take the buyer's place; judicial partition ends the indivision itself, by dividing the property or selling it and sharing the proceeds.

The two meet at the auction. Because a share sold at a lawful public auction cannot be pre-empted (article 302), shufaa does not reach the sale that ends a partition when the property is liquidated. A co-owner who wants to prevent a stranger acquiring a share acts through shufaa when the share is sold privately, and engages with the partition procedure when the whole property is being divided or sold.

Inheritance and shufaa work in sequence. Inheritance determines who the co-owners are and the size of each share; shufaa may then arise later, if one of those co-owners sells their undivided share.

The link is also built into the priority rules: article 297 prefers a co-owner who shares the seller's same inheritance portion, then the other heirs, then the legatees, before strangers. So the composition of the estate can decide who ranks first among competing pre-emptors — but the calculation of who inherits and in what proportion belongs to the inheritance rules, not to this procedure.

Living outside Morocco does not remove a co-owner's shufaa right, but it makes the tight deadlines harder to meet. A Moroccan abroad, or a foreign co-owner, usually acts through a representative under a power of attorney rather than travelling for each step, and the practical work is front-loaded: a valid power of attorney, proof of the co-owner's status and share, the foreign documents with sworn translations and, where required, legalisation or apostille, and a way to fund the genuine tender or the court-fund deposit from abroad.

The notice rule adds a particular risk. Because a personal notice starts a thirty-day clock (article 304), a co-owner abroad needs a reliable channel for receiving documents and instructing counsel quickly. Nationality of the buyer does not, in itself, create or defeat shufaa; the right turns on the statutory co-ownership conditions, not on where the parties live.

In a shufaa matter, counsel in Morocco typically verifies the claimant's co-owner status and its anteriority, reviews the land title or the deeds, obtains the sale contract and the proof of its registration, and identifies precisely which trigger — personal notice, registration, or knowledge — starts the deadline in the case at hand.

From there the work is to calculate the price and costs to be tendered, make the genuine tender and, if it is refused, the court-fund deposit within the deadline, preserve the evidence of timing, identify and join the necessary parties, lodge any opposition needed for property under registration, challenge a simulated gift or an artificial price where the evidence supports it, manage priority between several pre-emptors, take an appeal where warranted, and see a successful judgment through to correction of the register at ANCFCC.

For a Moroccan abroad or a foreign co-owner, the useful division of labour is that foreign counsel or the client assembles the powers of attorney, the civil-status and ownership documents, the sworn translations and any legalisation or apostille, and arranges the transfer of funds for the tender or deposit, while the shufaa action itself is conducted before the Moroccan court under Moroccan law.

Coordination is mostly about the calendar and the record: getting authenticated documents and instructions in place before the thirty-day notice period or another deadline expires, and keeping the proof of ownership, share and timing in order. This guide is general and informational and does not create a lawyer-client relationship or imply that AvocAffaire acts for any party.

The statutory framework for shufaa is the Code of Real Rights (Law 39-08), articles 292 to 312, in its current consolidated form — including the 2024 amendment (Law 42.24) to article 310. The definition and conditions are in articles 292 to 298, the rules on multiple, bundled and successive sales and the auction and gift exclusions in articles 296 to 303, the notice and deadlines in article 304, the procedure and the competent court in articles 305 and 306, and the effects and extinction of the right in articles 307 to 312.

Procedure around the action follows the current Code of Civil Procedure (Law 58.25, in force since 24 August 2026); for registered property, registration of the outcome is handled under the land-registration framework and by ANCFCC. Primary texts should be consulted through the Secretariat-General of the Government and the official bulletin; the specific deadlines, documents and any fees for a given file should be confirmed against the current text and with the competent court and registry.

The answers below are general and informational and do not replace advice on a specific file.