Withdrawal before the start of the school year: can tuition fees be reimbursed?

Mr F. enrolls his son in a private higher education school in accordance with the terms of the contract drawn up by the institution. When sending the file, he pays 3 checks covering the registration and tuition fees. The first 2 checks are cashed once the withdrawal period has expired. Mr. F.'s son was then admitted to another school. M.F. immediately informs the first institution that he is waiving registration and requests reimbursement of all amounts paid.

However, the school cashes the final check for the remaining tuition fees, while classes have not started and enrollment is still open.

Mr F. applies to the court for reimbursement of the costs paid. The latter accedes to his request.

The school considers that while admission to another school may be legitimate, it is not a compelling reason. She decides to appeal. It invokes the clause in the contract stating that tuition fees are due in full for any school year, except in the event of early termination justified by a case of force majeure or by a legitimate and compelling reason.

The parents of the student argue, during the appeal proceedings, that this clause of the contract is unfair.

The Court of Appeal declared the clause “unwritten” (in other words, abusive) and ordered the institution to reimburse all tuition fees to the parents. On the other hand, it considers that the registration fees are due to the establishment, the withdrawal having taken place beyond the withdrawal period.

It notes that the absence of modulation (reduction or partial reimbursement) of tuition fees, depending on the dates of registration and renunciation, creates a significant imbalance to the detriment of the student. According to the applicant, by not providing for that modulation, the institution may retain the full tuition fees of a student who has opted out well before the start of the academic year, enroll another student in his place, and thus collect the cost of the training for 2 students. However, the student who has given up taking this training very early will have no compensation.

The school decides to go to the Court of Cassation.

Is a clause stipulating that tuition fees for the whole year are due in full from the time the contract is signed, except in the case of early termination for force majeure or legitimate and compelling reasons, unfair?

Public Service replies:

In its decision of 26 November 2025, the Cour de cassation recalls the provisions of the Consumer Code (Article L. 212-1) : in contracts concluded between traders and consumers, clauses creating, to the detriment of the consumer, a significant imbalance between the rights and obligations of the parties to the contract are unfair.

A contractual clause requiring full payment of tuition fees at the time of signing the contract is unfair because it does not provide for the retention of tuition fees to be adjusted according to the date of withdrawal, with regard to the date of the start of the courses. And this, even with the contractual reservation of a case of force majeure or a legitimate and compelling reason.

The Court goes further by finding that this clause confers an excessive advantage on the institution to the detriment of the student. It rejects the institution’s argument that the contractual term providing for the event of such termination could not in fact be unfair. It confirms the decision of the Court of Appeal requesting reimbursement of the family's tuition fees.