Société simple: figuring out the statutes

I am creating a new thread, building on the one from the Helping Circle, so that we can get all messages about figuring out the statutes in one thread.

Hello all,

This afternoon @ugne and I had a meeting with Madeleine the lawyer.

We spent most of the meeting on two things:

  1. Clarifying some legal terms that are needed to understand the statutes, e.g. démembrement, usufruit, nue-propriété, cession des parts, copropriété forcée etc.

  2. Explaining some of our more complicated questions

We agreed on the following next steps:

  • She will look at our table with questions, and write some quick answers.

  • For the more complicated questions she may call the notary to get some clarifications.

  • She will work on the statutes and make amendments (in tracked changes) to change some of the clauses so that they better fit our way of working (e.g. voting).

  • She will get back in touch in the course of next week, sending us the table, the statutes with track changes and her work sheet (so that we can keep an eye on our budget).

I have taken notes of the things she explained. I could easily type this out, but I prefer to wait until she comes back to us, so that I don’t spend time that isn’t needed.

All this should get us a whole lot closer to finalising this task.

Here’s a rough overview of what I think we need to do afterwards:

  • Look at the answers and amendments, and do a final iteration.

  • Make a two-pager “statutes for dummies” in which we explain the key terms, the essence of what’s in the statutes (GA, Conseil de Gestion etc) and a separate section on certain implications that everybody who joins must understand.

  • Once we have a stable version of the two-pager and the amended statutes, we can start discussing it at the plenary.

  • Once we reach consent, we are in principle ready to launch the société simple. The practicalities should be rather simple: sign the document, register it in the BCE and something else the notary will take care of.

@ugne would you be ok to take care of the agenda for Thursday’s meeting, or would you prefer I do it?

@alberto would you possibly be available for that meeting?


Hi @Lee,

Wow, you were very fast in drafting this and summarizing. I found the lawyer really good and very much with feet on the ground to explain that seemed super complicated in simple terms and giving examples.
I agree we should rather wait before she gets back to us , as some things we noted will be in the answers she will provide.

I can draft an agenda for Thursday and share with you. You can always complete it. If I understand correctly, the focus of the meeting will be :

  • giving feedback on the discussion with the lawyer (8 Dec)
  • check on the status of two pager (simplified société simple Doc version)
  • agree on next steps and deadlines
  • see what can we do with the questions to the notary, if there are still any.


1 Like

Hi @ugne,

I am happy to meet, but I am not sure whether meeting at this point will add a lot value.

Happy to do that, but not sure whether this is enough to convey a meeting at this point.

I’d also like to get some more clarity who is actually an active member of the Statutes Helping Circle. It’s nobody’s fault, but it’s just no longer clear to me.

I think this is urgent and important, and at the same time without a good understand of the difficult terms that we clarified (and thus, the lawyer’s written feedback) I am not sure there is a lot of progress that we can make in the next week.

Dearly needed this one, but also here I’m not sure whether we’ll have all the information, and whether this is enough to convey a meeting.

This one is not fully clear to me. Do you mean the final remaining questions on the statutes, after we’ll have the lawyer’s input?

As I said, I don’t want to be contrarian and I’d be happy to meet. I guess I’m just offering my thoughts on whether there is enough to convey a meeting, but happy to follow your lead. Equally happy to have a quick call to clarify a couple of things if that can be helpful.

Hi @reef-finance ,

We’ve discussed with @Lee that given the discussion above, we will cancel Thursday’s Helping Circle team’s meeting and invite @Lee to join the begining of team’s finance meeting on Wednesday at 7pm to align & get some updates on société simple doc as Helping Circle team consists of the same people.

Please let me know if you can not attend Wednesday 's meeting.

A conference I will attend on Wednesday normally ends at 19:30. I might skip the last part and try to make it, but can’t be sure. Sorry! I will send you a message Ugne with my comments/ questions in advance re the helping circle, in case. I had been home last Sunday for that meeting we then had to cancel. I think it is a good idea for Lie to join the beginning of the finance meeting as we are the same people involved, to know where we are and who does what.

1 Like

Sure, @Andrea_W , join whenever you can!

For the rest, here are the very last minutes of the Helping Circle team to refresh your memory on what we discussed last time.

@reef-finance & @Lee
See the agenda for Wednesday. Please edit it if i forgot something.

Hi @reef-finance , hi @Lee
Here comes the team finance minutes from yesterdays’ meeting (13 Dec).

Best wishes


Hello all,

We received a reply from the lawyer. I saved her documents in the société simple folder. I might have a look, but as discussed the responsibility is now with @reef-finance.

@ugne: I also saved her time sheet in the same folder. Good to have a look in view of our budget.


Thank you, @Lee
Tomorrow traveling but will have a look shortly.


1 Like

Hi @reef-finance and pinging @Lee here in case

We received an email from the lawyer and need to think & agree on what we do.

"Dear Ugne,

About the Notary, I confirm that it is hard to contact him directly.I however have been in contact with his secretary on the phone this morning and she gave me his direct e-mail adress. I think it would be efficient to plan a meeting with the Notary to sign the statutes.

As the questions left are questions of detail, they might be clarified and the statutes modified at this meeting directly. His secretary told me as well that his agenda is already full in January. This is also why it would be efficient for you to already ask a meeting now, for signing the Statutes.

You will probably get a meeting in February. In this regard I suggest to send him the following e-mail with the Statutes (with the track changes) and the remaining questions, for him to be able to prepare the meeting:

Mon cher Notaire,

J’ai l’honneur de vous adresser la présente en ma qualité de conseil des membres de la future Société Simple « The Reef ».Je suis consultée par eux pour répondre à toutes leurs questions, soulevées par la construction juridique que vous proposez pour leur projet d’habitat groupé en auto-promotion.
Je me suis donc plongée dans les Statuts que vous avez rédigé et ai pu répondre à la plupart des questions des clients.

Il s’ensuit que, suite aux réflexions des clients, j’ai proposé quelques changements mineurs dans les Statuts, que je souhaite soumettre à votre approbation.

Vous les trouverez en annexe de la présente, en « trackchanges ».

Je me demande en particulier s’il est bien légalement admis de dire que :

  • les abstentions et absences ne sont pas comptabilisées du tout dans le comptage des votes -comme ce que souhaitent les clients- (versus les abstentions et absences sont comptabilisées comme vote négatif – comme ce que vous aviez initialement indiqué dans les Statuts) ;

  • les PV d’AG peuvent être rédigés en anglais – comme les clients souhaitent l’ajouter ;

  • l’admission d’un nouvel associé doit être décidée à l’unanimité et par vote anonyme – comme les clients souhaitent le préciser.

J’ai également ajouté un mode de décision pour le Collège de Gestion. Quelles majorités conseillez-vous pour les prises de décision du Collège de gestion ?

Enfin, il reste quelques précisions que vous saurez mieux que moi leur donner :

  • Que se passe-t-il concrètement lorsqu’un héritier hérite d’un des Associés/Habitants ? Ai-je bien compris qu’en réalité, l’héritier n’hérite que des parts de l’Associé dans la Société simple (et qu’il n’hérite donc pas directement de la propriété sur un appartement en copropriété) et qu’en outre, il doit être admis par l’assemblée générale pour devenir associé avec un droit de vote.

Doit-on donc comprendre que l’héritier non admis sera obligé de céder ses parts ou de se retirer (conformément à l’article 8b) à défaut de trouver un cessionnaire admissible ? Que se passe-t-il si cet ayant cause refuse de se retirer ou de céder ses parts ?

  • Que se passe-t-il concrètement lorsqu’un créancier tiers souhaite saisir l’appartement d’un des associés ?

Ai-je bien compris qu’en réalité, il ne pourra que saisir les parts de cet Associé et le forcer à sortir d’indivision, donc à céder ses parts ?

Ai-je bien compris que, si l’associé débiteur ne trouve pas de personne admissible à qui céder ses parts, il sera obligé de se retirer et que la Société devra lui racheter ses parts conformément à la procédure de retrait ?

  • Que signifie le terme « véhicule juridique de l’Habitat groupé » ? S’agit-il de la future copropriété et/ou de la présente Asbl ? Comment faut-il que les clients articulent leur Asbl avec la Société simple et la future Copropriété ? Quels sont les avantages de cette Asbl une fois la Société créée ?

Au vu des questions qui précèdent, il me semble qu’une réunion peut déjà être fixée avec les clients pour la signature des Statuts.

Sauf avis contraire de votre part, les précisions demandées pourront être données lors de cette réunion et les derniers détails pourront être finalisés si nécessaire à ce moment également.
Qu’en pensez-vous ?

Auriez-vous des dates à proposer aux clients pour la signature des Statuts ?

Je vous remercie vivement d’avance pour votre attention.
Votre bien dévouée,»

Ugne here:

  • are you ok with the email drafted above in FR for the notary (i think it’s very good, but let me know if you want to add something)
  • do we ask for a date in February to sign? We must ensure to be ready and will we?


Good afternoon,
Thanks for sharing!
I also think it is a very good e-mail.
I believe like you, Ugnė, that February might be a bit ambitious. Maybe push it to March?

1 Like

Hi Ugne,

Can we make this more concrete based on what we discussed at the plenary meeting? We referred to the plenary meetings of the end January and mid-February. Can we take the plenary after that as contingency and use that as our deadline for a meeting with the notary?

1 Like

@reef-finance , Any other comments or can i send the email to the notary?

Our March plenary is on 19th March. This would be our deadline to meet the notary.

Can we ask the question again about the cost of this undertaking? @alberto suggested that as a minimum we suggest that we deduct the money we paid to the lawyer.

1 Like

Hi Ugne, thanks for sharing! Looks like a good email to me, thanks. Although adding a question on cost - as @Lee suggested, sounds like a good idea.

Best! J

Hello @reef-finance, here’s a small follow-up on our last team meeting re: société simple.

  1. My background document is ready and donwloadable from here. Could someone please review it before I post it on the forum? Ideally someone with no legal background, so @ugne or @Angelika. Plese note that I have taken the liberty to move the “Société simple” folder up one level, into the main Team Finance folder (used to be in “Notary”). So, the document is now in The Reef shared folder => Team Finance => Société simple.
  2. Our minutes say that Lie was to initiate the “article by article in simple words” document, and @Justin_N was to complete it. Lie is very tired, and I would propose to take this task ouf of her hands. So, here I can see two ways forward:
    1. Justin takes over this.
    2. We adopt a different solution. Re-reading the statutes and the lawyer’s document, I don’t find it that obscure: maybe an annotated version would be enough. By that I mean: statutes in French, with comments in English containing the definitions of legal terms (like nue-propriété), the examples given to us by the lawyer, and her answers to questions already asked by the team.


1 Like

Hi @alberto,

On point 2: I think it wasn´t clear what the form of the explanatory doc would be, that´s why Lie offered to do a skeleton first. If it would have been an article by article translation in simplified EN I wouldn´t have needed a skeleton, because the structure would simply be the statutes in FR.

But I now realise we need that article-by-article knowledge in EN anyway, in order to present the statutes thorougly to the group at a plenary. So I could write such a detailed explanation doc, that would contain everything I think would need to be explained at such a meeting and that people might possibly have questions about. This risks to be quite long, so I do plead that we do not translate everything fully, but use judgment to keep the translations for obvious articles and concepts super succint, almost stenographic.

In terms of timing: I think this wasn´t decided at our last meeting, but are we aiming to present this at a February plenary? I can write and wrap this up by 28 Jan.

How does that sound?

1 Like

This seems like a case of “doer decides”. I would be quite happy with a document with untranslated, but annotated in English, document, but if you want a mostly-translated one and you are doing it yourself, that’s fine.

Anyway, I think that speed is more important than perfection. Once we have a document out, we can present it, improve it based on the questions asked, etc.

1 Like