The provision allowing British nationals with second residences in France to remain in the nation for longer than ninety days was declared unlawful by the French Constitutional Court.

The Constitutional Council’s judgment cannot be appealed, according to The Telegraph, making the modification that was approved in November final.

The proposed law was designed to give British homeowners in France the freedom to visit the Schengen area for an unlimited period of time. Since Brexit, however, British nationals are only permitted to stay for a maximum of 90 days every 180 days, just like any other non-Schengen national holding a visa facilitation arrangement. Brits who wish to stay longer must apply for a long-stay visa, which is usually good for up to six months.

This plan was started by French Senator Martine Berth of the Savoi region, who received complaints from British second homeowners in her district. She stressed that limiting Brits would have a detrimental effect on the local French economies because extending their stay would help address the growing number of abandoned properties in popular tourist destinations.

British nationals’ interest in buying property in France increased in the month after the amendment was passed; international real estate marketplace Kyero recorded a 582% rise in British searches for French properties. The region of Alpes-Maritimes in southeast France was the most frequently contacted, followed by Haute-Vienne and Charente.

The wider immigration measure, which includes the provision granting British citizens extended stays, has generated discussion and controversy in France since it is thought to be unfair. The controversial immigration measure has drawn criticism from UN Special Rapporteur on Racism Ashwini KP, who stated that it violates a fundamental principle of the nation. Tens of thousands of people participated in anti-change protests in French cities, calling on President Macron to veto the legislation.

The new law is anticipated to be among the most stringent for immigrants, restricting their access to state healthcare and making it easier for individuals with criminal records to be deported, among other things.