Renting an apartment from a company to house an employee, making a property available for a few months or keeping accommodation as a second home: in these cases, the civil lease is often preferred to freely set the duration and terms of exit from the rental. But this freedom has a clear limit: if the accommodation becomes the main residence of the occupant, the civil lease goes beyond its legal framework.
Coming under common law, the civil lease is in fact exempt from the law of July 6, 1989… as long as the accommodation does not constitute the main residence of the occupant. It is on this border that most of the disputes are concentrated: the judges base themselves on the reality of the occupation, and not on the title of the contract. In their analysis, the courts rely on precise factual elements – tax address, energy subscriptions, home insurance, receipt of mail or effective duration of occupation – likely to establish the existence of a main residence, even when the contract explicitly provides for a civil lease.
Real risks for the lessor
From then on, the contract is reclassified as a residential lease subject to the 1989 law, with the application of the rules protecting the tenant (minimum duration of the lease, supervision of leave and rents, regulated eviction procedure). In practice, this reclassification most often occurs during a dispute, whether unpaid debt, a refusal of leave or an attempted eviction.
The consequences for the lessor can be serious, between calling into question the leave, retroactive application of the protective status and contesting the rents received. According to data from the Ministry of Justice and the Foundation for Housing the Disadvantaged (formerly the Abbé Pierre Foundation), rental disputes represent nearly 40% of civil cases.
In the luxury real estate segment, where the financial stakes are high, the search for contractual flexibility further increases exposure to risk. The civil lease, however, remains legal in precisely regulated cases, in particular for seasonal rentals, secondary residences, accommodation rented to businesses or temporary occupations without the character of a main residence.
Legal insecurity reinforced by litigation practice
Often perceived as more flexible, the civil lease can actually turn against the lessor in the event of a conflict. In the absence of a specific legal framework, termination of the contract requires legal intervention, with delays and costs difficult to anticipate. This context comes at a time when a new status for private landlords has been adopted with the Jeanbrun system.
Without directly targeting civil leases, the text is part of a broader dynamic of regulation of rental practices, likely to lead to a more attentive look at atypical contracts. Under these conditions, civil lease can no longer be considered as a comfort alternative. Its drafting requires extreme legal rigor and perfect adequacy with the real situation of the occupier. Otherwise, the flexibility sought can quickly turn into a source of heavy and costly litigation.
