French Court Rejects Challenge to €14,198 in Benefits; Family Allowance Dispute Goes to Civil Court
A mother says her children remained in Morocco because their father refused to let them return to France. The Vaucluse CAF is seeking €21,029 in benefits from her. The Nîmes Administrative Court reviewed her challenge in a ruling dated May 29, 2026.
It began with a check on the family’s residence. Between October 2021 and August 2023, the children were not enrolled in school in France, and their mother was also absent from the country. The CAF sought repayment of several benefits paid between 2020 and 2023, then issued a payment order on July 27, 2024.
On Bladi.net : CAF Seeks €6,535 in Repayments After Mother Failed to Report Daughter’s Morocco Stay and Family Transfers
The mother disputes the repayment. She says the children attended school in Morocco because their father refused to let them return to France. She cites school certificates and her registration with Pôle emploi, while also challenging the evidence used to establish that she did not have a stable residence in France.
The amount claimed is exactly €21,029.09: €13,449.27 in personalized housing assistance, €6,831 in family and back-to-school allowances, €548.82 in Christmas bonuses and €200 in exceptional solidarity assistance.
The court distinguishes between two parts of the debt
In its ruling of May 29, 2026, the court found that the mother was absent from France between October 2021 and August 2023 and that the children were not enrolled in school in the country. It rejected her challenge to the housing assistance, Christmas bonuses and exceptional assistance, totaling €14,198.09.
On Bladi.net : Living in Morocco with her three children, she still declared them as enrolled in school in France: 26,505 euros to repay
As for the €6,831 in family and back-to-school allowances, the judges said they lacked jurisdiction. The mother nevertheless says she followed the appeal instructions provided by the administration. The judges noted that these benefits fall under the jurisdiction of the civil court, regardless of the instructions she received.
Her challenge therefore failed with respect to the €14,198.09 in housing and exceptional assistance. The dispute over the €6,831 in family benefits falls under the jurisdiction of the civil courts, which alone are competent to hear that part of the case.
