Easements and Rights of Way in Morocco 2026: Establishment, Remedies, Procedure and Costs

Easements and rights of way over land in Morocco are governed mainly by Law No. 39-08 establishing the Code of Rights in Rem, promulgated by Dahir No. 1-11-178 of November 22, 2011. Article 37 defines an easement as an encumbrance imposed on immovable property for the use or benefit of another immovable property belonging to a different owner. The property bearing the encumbrance is called the servient tenement; the property benefiting from it is the dominant tenement.

Article 38 of the Code of Rights in Rem distinguishes easements arising from the natural configuration of the land, those imposed by law and those created by agreement between the owners. This distinction determines the entire strategy. A right of way necessary to provide access to a landlocked property may be claimed despite the neighbor’s refusal, whereas a right of way sought merely for convenience normally requires a title or agreement. A neighborhood practice therefore does not automatically become a right in rem.

For registered immovable property, the land title plays a decisive role. Articles 62 and 65 of the Dahir of August 12, 1913 on Land Registration govern, respectively, the conclusiveness of the title and the registration of rights in rem. In practical terms, a contractual easement not registered with the ANCFCC may not be enforceable against a subsequent purchaser of the servient tenement. The ownership certificate must therefore be checked, together with the plans and ancillary registrations.

For unregistered melk land, Law No. 39-08 remains applicable, but proof is more complex. The court examines adoul deeds, the chain of title, admissible testimony, official reports, plans and the physical condition of the premises. Possession must not be confused with an indisputable title. If the land belongs to the public domain, the State or a territorial authority, jurisdiction may shift to the administrative court.

Articles 40 et seq. of the Code of Rights in Rem address, in particular, constraints arising from the natural configuration of the land. The owner of lower-lying land must receive water that flows naturally from higher land. However, the owner of the higher land may not artificially worsen the flow by concentrating roof water, altering the gradient or directing a pipe toward the neighboring property. Wastewater is clearly not subject to the same rules as naturally flowing water.

A sewer, irrigation or supply pipeline crossing neighboring land must have a clear legal basis. An agreement must specify its route, diameter, maintenance access, allocation of repair costs and liability in the event of leakage. For registered immovable property, the agreement must comply with the form required by Article 4 of the Code of Rights in Rem and then be submitted to the ANCFCC. A mere verbal authorization exposes both owners to a dispute upon a sale.

For views over neighboring land, the Code of Rights in Rem distinguishes a direct view, which allows a person to look directly onto the neighboring property, from an oblique view, which requires the person to lean out or turn their head. The distances traditionally established by the Code are two meters for a direct view and one meter for an oblique view, subject to urban-planning rules and the characteristics of the opening. An opening that allows only light to pass through may be classified differently.

Common ownership mainly concerns walls, fences or structures separating two properties. It entails rights of use, as well as an obligation to contribute to necessary preservation costs. Before raising, opening up or demolishing a dividing wall, its status must be checked through the deeds, cadastral plan and physical indications. As for temporary access for works, it does not permit unrestricted entry onto a neighbor’s land: temporary access to repair a wall must be accepted by the neighbor or authorized by the judge.

In the absence of an agreement, proceedings relating to immovable property are brought before the Court of First Instance of the place where the land is located, in accordance with the territorial jurisdiction rule in Article 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The claimant seeks recognition or termination of the easement, determination of the route and, if necessary, assessment of compensation. The application must correctly identify all owners. An error concerning the title, joint ownership or an heir’s legal capacity may delay the case.

The relevant file includes a recent ownership certificate, purchase agreement, cadastral plan, topographical plan, dated photographs, urban-planning authorizations and exchanged correspondence. For unregistered land, adoul deeds, administrative certificates and evidence establishing the boundaries are added. A judicial officer’s report may prove that a gate was closed or that the access claimed by the opposing party is physically impracticable, but it does not replace the surveyor’s technical analysis.

The court may order an expert assessment pursuant to Articles 55 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure. The expert examines the landlocked situation, considers several routes, measures the affected area and assesses the damage. The parties must attend the expert operations or be represented, submit their documents and make written observations. After the report is filed, they may challenge its findings and request a supplementary or new expert assessment, but the judge is never legally bound by the expert’s opinion.

If a right of way that has actually been used is suddenly obstructed, the President of the Court may be applied to in urgent proceedings pursuant to Articles 149 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Urgent proceedings are used to order a provisional measure when there is urgency and the merits of the right must not be finally determined. They must not be presented as an automatic means of obtaining a new easement. If the existence of the right is seriously disputed, substantive proceedings will remain necessary.

A judgment of the Court of First Instance may be appealed, generally within thirty days after its service under Article 134 of the Code of Civil Procedure, subject to the exact nature of the decision. An appeal on points of law may subsequently be considered within the statutory time limit, normally thirty days under Article 358, but the Court of Cassation does not reassess the land measurements. It reviews the legal classification, reasoning and compliance with procedural rules.

The end of the landlocked situation, merger of the two tenements, waiver or permanent impossibility of exercising the easement may justify its termination under the provisions of the Code of Rights in Rem, particularly Article 69. Non-use must be proved with caution; it is not enough to claim that no one has used the right of way recently. If the easement is registered on the land title, its removal requires an instrument acceptable to the Registrar or a final court decision.

A right of way may benefit unregistered melk land. The absence of a land title does not negate Article 64 of the Code of Rights in Rem, but it complicates the identification of the owner and the boundaries. The claimant must produce the melkia deed, transfer deeds, available certificates and a topographical plan. Witness testimony may supplement the case file, without necessarily remedying a contradictory chain of title or a plot that cannot be located.

In douars, the caïd often acts as a mediator. Meeting minutes, a statement concerning the existence of an old road or an administrative report may assist the court, but the local authority cannot, by itself, create a definitive private easement. Agreements made orally before witnesses must be formalised in a manner compliant with Article 4 of Law No. 39-08. Care must also be taken not to present a collective track as the exclusive property of an individual.

Soulaliyate collective lands are governed in particular by Law No. 62-17 on administrative supervision of soulaliyate communities and the management of their property. A rights holder cannot, on their own initiative, grant an easement over collective land as if they were its individual owner. The community, the competent bodies and the supervisory authority must be identified. The civil court does not necessarily have jurisdiction to challenge an administrative decision concerning such land.

When a land registration application is pending, the ANCFCC file, boundary survey plan and filed objections must be reviewed. A claimed right of way must be reported at the appropriate time so that its status can be examined before the title is issued. Registration extinguishes prior rights that have not been duly preserved under the conditions of the 1913 Dahir. Waiting until the procedure has ended may therefore place the alleged beneficiary in a very unfavourable evidentiary position.

Lastly, the status of the road must be verified. A municipal road, a public-domain track, a collective road and a strip owned by a neighbour are not governed by the same rules. Cadastral plans, municipal documents and information from the local authority must be compared with the physical condition of the premises. Bringing proceedings before the civil court against an owner who does not legally own the road may result in the claim being declared inadmissible or in a plea of lack of jurisdiction.

The licensed land surveyor addresses the factual question: where are the boundaries and which routes are technically possible? The lawyer addresses the legal question: which right may be invoked, against whom and before which court? Their roles are complementary. An excellent plan does not remedy proceedings brought against the wrong person, while a well-drafted application does not prove that no other access exists.

Before the consultation, contracts, ownership certificates, cadastral plans, permits, photographs, letters, official minutes and inheritance deeds should be gathered. A one-page chronology helps distinguish established facts from family accounts. For a Moroccan residing abroad, the power of attorney must precisely identify the authorised acts. A general power of attorney that has not been properly legalised or translated may prevent execution, expert appraisal or representation before certain authorities.

The lawyer verifies jurisdiction, prepares the formal notice, chooses between interim proceedings and an action on the merits, requests a useful expert assignment and then submits observations on the report. The lawyer may also negotiate a limited easement rather than pursue full litigation. In practical terms, an agreement on the route, together with a gate and reasonable compensation, often preserves the value of both properties better than a decision imposed after several years of conflict.

Early consultation is particularly recommended where the right of way affects a land title, jointly inherited property, soulaliyate land, the public domain or a construction project. It does not guarantee any outcome, but it helps eliminate a misdirected claim and quantify the risk. The professional should be asked for a fee agreement, a list of missing documents and a written explanation of the amicable and judicial options.