1. The framework: two laws in force, one reform passed but not promulgated
The co-ownership of built buildings in Morocco rests on law 18-00, the founding text. It was amended and supplemented by law 106-12 in 2016. Then came law 30-24, which amends 18-00 again and was passed unanimously on 9 July 2024 — but which has not been promulgated and is therefore not yet in force. It is this last text that concerns us here, and more precisely the amendment it announces to article 13.
Here, we focus on a single thing: the obligation to attempt a conciliation that the reform provides for.
2. What the announced amendment of article 13 (really) provides
The contribution is simple to state and heavy in practical consequences: once promulgated, law 30-24 will require that any legal action by the managing agent be preceded by an attempt at conciliation. For as long as the text is not published, this step is not a legal condition — but in the life of a building it remains the cheapest way to settle a disagreement.
Prior conciliation would cover, according to the text as passed, the main day-to-day disputes of a condominium:
- Unpaid charges — the most frequent ground of dispute.
- Unauthorised works carried out by a co-owner.
- Misuse of the common areas.
- Breaches of the condominium bylaws.
An essential point not to over-interpret: the text does not set deadlines or detailed terms of the conciliation. It lays down the principle, not the procedure. Be wary, therefore, of any source announcing a precise numeric deadline — or presenting law 30-24 as already applicable: on this point, prudence commands sticking to what the text says, and documenting a serious attempt rather than ticking a formal box.
3. Why this reform, and what it will change
The spirit is clear: to favour amicable settlement. Too many condominium disputes — often for modest amounts — go straight to litigation, where a framed discussion would have sufficed. By conditioning action on an attempt at conciliation, the legislator wants to impose a step of dialogue.
For the managing agent, the « unpaid charge → immediate action » reflex is living its last months. A sequence will be required: a traced attempt at conciliation, then — only if it fails — the start of proceedings. For the debtor or conflicting co-owner, it will be an additional window to regularise. For the syndical council, it will be a point of vigilance: to verify that the managing agent has respected this step before incurring costs on behalf of the union. Nothing prevents adopting this sequence today: it will be required in any case on the day of promulgation.
The reflex to remember: document, do not improvise
Since the text does not set the terms, it is traceability that will protect the managing agent. Keep the proof of the convocation to the conciliation (by any legal means, or even by bailiff), the precise subject of the dispute, and minutes recording the attempt and its outcome (agreement, failure, absence of the co-owner). It is this file, documented and verifiable line by line, that will let you show your good faith and move forward if the conciliation fails. Conversely, an oral, untraced step leaves nothing usable behind — and costs months.
4. Prior conciliation and the recovery of charges: the articulation
This is where practice plays out. The recovery of charges relies on solid guarantees arising from 18-00 and 106-12 — the ones that apply today — which law 30-24 will not remove:
- The union privilege and the forced mortgage that secure the charges claim.
- The 5-year prescription for the recovery of charges.
- The formal notice and the recovery procedure.
What 30-24 will change is the order of operations: the claim and its guarantees will still exist, but their implementation will pass through the conciliation stage. Concretely, the managing agent facing an unpaid charge has every interest in integrating this step into their sequence now, rather than having to change habits overnight.
5. Conciliation in the ecosystem of the 30-24 reform
Prior conciliation does not live alone: law 30-24 provides for strengthening, in parallel, the place of the co-owners and the transparency of the union's life. Two contributions of the text as passed deserve to be known, because they feed the same logic of dialogue before conflict:
- The convocation of the general assembly by one or more co-owners, by any legal means or by bailiff, with a 15-day notice stating date, time, place and agenda. Once the text is promulgated, co-owners will no longer depend entirely on the managing agent's initiative to have a question decided at the assembly.
- The notification of assembly decisions within 8 days, together with the delivery of the minutes.
The overall coherence is clear: give more levers to co-owners upstream (to convene, to be informed) and impose a chamber of dialogue downstream (conciliation) before the union starts proceedings. These three contributions will share the same fate: they will enter into force together, on the day of promulgation.
6. And if the conciliation does not succeed? What remains to the building
Conciliation is an attempt, not an obligation of result. If it fails — agreement refused, co-owner absent, irreconcilable position —, the contentious route reopens, with the conciliation file in support. The tools of 18-00 and 106-12 remain available, notably the provisional administrator (law 106-12) where the management of the building is deadlocked.
Important: these steps fall under the judicial procedure, a terrain with its own rules, where the expert is appointed by the court seized. A technical note or a private valuation commissioned by the union serves to frame the file, quantify a loss or objectify a situation upstream: it is documented and verifiable line by line, and that is what makes it useful to a discussion between co-owners. The distinction is exactly the same as in matters of recourse against a managing agent.
7. Expertise in the service of conciliation: objectify to reach agreement
A successful conciliation often rests on quantified and neutral facts that both parties can accept. This is precisely where an independent real estate valuation in Morocco brings value, in two typical cases:
- Unauthorised works or damage to common areas: quantifying the cost of reinstatement or the loss of value in a documented report, to turn a disagreement of appreciation into an amount that can be discussed around the table.
- Misuse or enjoyment of a common area: objectifying the scale and impact, rather than pitting two feelings against each other.
An independent valuation report compliant with RICS (Red Book) standards — condition observed, surfaces verified, explicit methodology, comparables documented — gives the conciliation a factual basis, documented and verifiable line by line, that few parties challenge in good faith. Carried out by RICS-certified experts, it is delivered in 5 to 8 days (48-72 h express), from 3,500 MAD excl. tax, firm quote within 24 h. At this amicable stage, the goal is simple: to give the parties something on which to decide and negotiate.
8. FAQ
Is prior conciliation already mandatory?
No. Law 30-24 was passed on 9 July 2024 but has not been promulgated: it is not in force. As things stand, the applicable regime remains law 18-00 as amended by law 106-12. Once promulgated, law 30-24 will require an attempt at conciliation before the managing agent acts. In the meantime, conciliation remains sound management practice, not a legal obligation.
Which disagreements would be concerned by the prior conciliation?
The text as passed targets the attempt at conciliation before the managing agent's legal action, citing in particular unpaid charges, unauthorised works, misuse of common areas and breaches of the bylaws. The text does not detail each case: in practice, integrate conciliation by default and confirm with a lawyer or professional managing agent for your precise situation.
What proof of conciliation will have to be kept?
Since the text does not set the terms, keep everything that establishes a serious and traced attempt: convocation to the conciliation (by any legal means or by bailiff), subject of the dispute, and minutes recording the attempt and its outcome. It is this file, documented and verifiable line by line, that will let you show the step taken if the conciliation fails.
Would law 30-24 remove the union privilege or the forced mortgage?
No. The union privilege, the forced mortgage and the 5-year prescription for charges, arising from law 18-00 and the 106-12 reform, remain — and they are the ones that apply today. Once promulgated, law 30-24 will add a step of dialogue upstream; it will not remove the recovery guarantees.
Is an expert valuation mandatory to conduct the conciliation?
No, no text requires it. But where the dispute concerns an amount or a loss (works, damage, misuse), an independent valuation report objectifies the discussion and facilitates amicable agreement. It is a negotiation tool, documented and verifiable line by line; in judicial procedure, the expert is appointed by the court seized. Report in 5 to 8 days, from 3,500 MAD excl. tax, quote within 24 h.
A condominium dispute to objectify before conciliation?
RICS-certified experts — neutral quantification of works, damage or losses to support a conciliation and facilitate amicable agreement. Report in 5 to 8 days (48-72 h express), everywhere in Morocco. To go further on the legal framework, see our condominium advisory.
Note: Prior conciliation would result from the amendment of article 13 of law 18-00 by law 30-24, passed unanimously on 9 July 2024 and awaiting promulgation: as things stand, the applicable regime remains law 18-00 as amended by law 106-12. The text lays down the principle but does not set deadlines or detailed terms: for the concrete implementation of an attempt at conciliation or an action, consult a lawyer or a professional managing agent. A private valuation serves to objectify a dispute with a view to an amicable negotiation; in judicial procedure, the expert is appointed by the court seized. To document the value or a loss, book our independent RICS appraisal service or browse the ReaConsult blog.