en restituant le double

15:52 Jul 31, 2019 

There's no rule (in France, anyway) that says you must make a deposit when you buy a property (assuming this is what we're talking of here). It is usual, as Tony M says, but it is by no means compulsory. Note that article 1590 starts with Si...> Si la promesse de vendre a été faite avec des arrhes.... See also here: https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F2965 where peut, as opposed to e.g. doit/tenu de, is used under Versement des arrhes. Incidentally, the same applies to the so-called "10% rule" (I've never paid more than 5%). This is just for information; as philgoddard says, it's not relevant to the translation itself, but I wonder what they mean by cette somme: some sort of downpayment that is legally different from arrhes?

15:03 Jul 31, 2019 

Thank you very much for these useful comments. I did guess this was the right meaning, but this gives me more confidence.

14:35 Jul 31, 2019 

I agree with Tony. Here is the article:

http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle...

I don't think the reason for waiving this provision is relevant to the translation.

Your translation could be a little more concise - "This amount shall not be considered as a deposit under article 1590 of the civil code".

14:24 Jul 31, 2019 

@asker

Maybe it is , "le double" of something as generally used in French; ex. le double des clés ou le double d'un contrat.. IMO

14:10 Jul 31, 2019 

First of all, note 'peut' — it's not 'shall' but rather 'may'.

That's right, if the VENDOR pulls out, they have to not only return the BUYER's deposit, but also the same amount again by way of damages. In the BUYER's case, perhaps not so much 'relinquishing' as 'forfeiting'?
The only bit I don't understand is why in this particular case, the usual rules seem NOT to apply...??!