Facts
On April 15, 1994, notary Y. executed a deed by which X. SA sold to M. 4443 m² of vineyard land, for the total price of 111,075 CHF. Before signing the deed, M. indicated that the proposed layout on the plan did not correspond to the alignment of the vines and asked the notary to have the plan corrected. The notary then called the surveyor, in the presence of the parties, who responded that the modification was possible. The deed was then signed by the parties.
Subsequently, the notary informed the parties that the boundary modification requested by M. actually required a land exchange covering an area of 1319 m². X. SA refused to carry out this exchange. M. then indicated that he was conditioning the payment of the sale price on the realization of this exchange. The price set in the deed was not paid at maturity.
M. filed an action for debt release, arguing that the contract did not bind him. He also called the notary as a third party. The cantonal court dismissed M.'s claims against X. SA and the notary.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considers that the action for liability against the notary falls under cantonal public law and is therefore not subject to an appeal for reform.
As for the dispute between M. and X. SA, the Federal…