Several attachments are marked LISIBLE
An invoice may carry only one additional document (BG-24) whose description (BT-123) is LISIBLE: it is the human-readable rendering of the invoice, and there is only one.
Only the issuer holds this value: Factlint reports it and never fabricates it. Test your invoice to find out whether it is affected.
The message your validator prints
Copied verbatim from the sealed artefact: this is the exact sentence the check prints when this rule fails.
ciiBR-FR-18/BT-123 : Il ne peut y avoir **qu’un seul** document additionnel (BG-24) dont la description (BT-123) est "LISIBLE". Nombre de documents trouvés : . Veuillez supprimer les doublons ou corriger les descriptions.
ubl[BR-FR-18/BT-123] : Il ne peut y avoir document additionnel (cac:AdditionalDocumentReference) dont la description (cbc:DocumentDescription) est "LISIBLE". Nombre de documents trouvés : . Veuillez supprimer les doublons ou corriger les descriptions.
Quoted from schematron-fnfe 1.4.0.03, licensed under Apache-2.0.
Common searches around this code
These phrases mirror what an integrator searches for: code, syntax, rule, business field and correction.
Test your file with this error in mind
Upload the invoice involved: the report will say whether this code appears, where it appears in the document, and whether Factlint can only report it or also fix it.
To automate this check in an ERP flow, call the validation API and link every returned code to its public page.
Why this error happens
The recipient displays the LISIBLE attachment on screen and archives it as the image of the invoice: two attachments means two possible invoices for a single flow. The duplicate comes from a PDF attached twice, or an annex qualified LISIBLE by default. The rule comes from the FNFE Schematron package, not from the European standard: an invoice perfectly compliant with EN 16931 triggers it as soon as it is judged against the French base.
How to fix it
Keep LISIBLE only on the invoice rendering; qualify the other attachments with their own code or remove the duplicate. Which one is right, only you know.
Severity returned by the rule set
Blocking since 1 September 2026: the current base, `fr-2026-09`, seals the FNFE 1.4.0.03 artefact in fatal mode, and it is the one the pinned engine applies by default. An invoice issued in August 2026 is judged against `fr-2026-08`, where the same rule comes out as a warning — which already rules out a “compliant” verdict. The API returns the severity of the rule set pinned for the judged invoice.
XML correction example
<ram:AdditionalReferencedDocument>…<ram:Name>LISIBLE</ram:Name>…</ram:AdditionalReferencedDocument><ram:AdditionalReferencedDocument>…<ram:Name>LISIBLE</ram:Name>…</ram:AdditionalReferencedDocument>
<ram:AdditionalReferencedDocument>…<ram:Name>LISIBLE</ram:Name>…</ram:AdditionalReferencedDocument>