Precarious SAFER Licence: The Trap of a Farm Lease After 5 Years

Imagine for a moment: you are a farmer in Langon, Gironde. For several years, you have been cultivating a plot of land belonging to the SAFER (Land Development and Rural Establishment Company), under a precarious occupation agreement renewed each year. Until the day the SAFER decides to recover the land. But you consider yourself the holder of a genuine farm lease, with all the rights that entails: stability, renewal, compensation in the event of eviction. Who is right?

This question, which hundreds of farmers and landowners ask themselves every year, was decided by the French Supreme Court in a judgment of 21 June 1995 (No. 93-16.356). The high court reminded that the use of precarious agreements by SAFER is not without limit: beyond five years, and in the absence of a consolidation project, the occupier can claim the protection of the farm lease status (law of 5 August 1960).

In short, this decision puts a stop to the abusive practices of certain SAFERs that used precarious agreements to circumvent the protective status of agricultural leases. But what exactly does this change for you, owner or farmer? Let's dive into the details.

The facts: a story that happens every day

In 1982, the SAFER of the Aquitaine region acquired a plot of land in Saint-Sauveur, near Langon. The objective: to create a land reserve in anticipation of a municipal land consolidation that was slow to materialise. In the meantime, it concluded a precarious occupation agreement each year with a local farmer, Mr X. These agreements were renewed without interruption until 1988.

On 21 September 1988, a new agreement was signed. But this time, the context had changed: on 26 April 1988, the municipality officially renounced the consolidation. The SAFER therefore found itself with a plot acquired more than five years earlier, with no prospect of land development. Despite this, it continued to conclude precarious agreements, arguing that the five-year period was suspended while the consolidation was still planned.

The farmer, for his part, considered this precarious agreement to be merely a device to deny him the status of a farm tenant. He brought the case before the agricultural lease tribunal to have the existence of a farm lease recognised as from 21 September 1988. The Bordeaux Court of Appeal ruled in his favour, and the SAFER appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the appeal judgment. It held that the SAFER could no longer, on 21 September 1988, conclude a new precarious agreement, as the maximum five-year period provided for by Article 17 of the law of 5 August 1960 had been exceeded, and the consolidation had been abandoned. The occupier therefore becomes entitled to a farm lease.

The court's reasoning — broken down

To understand this decision, one must first know the applicable text: Article 17 of the law of 5 August 1960 on land development and rural establishment. This text allows SAFER to conclude precarious occupation agreements on land it has acquired, for a maximum period of five years from the acquisition. This period is suspended (temporarily stopped) in municipalities where a consolidation is ongoing.

In our case, the SAFER had acquired the plot in 1982. The five-year period therefore expired in 1987. But the municipality had considered a consolidation until 26 April 1988, when it abandoned it. The question was whether the suspension period relating to the consolidation project allowed the SAFER to sign a new precarious agreement after 26 April 1988.

The Supreme Court answers no. It considers that the suspension only applies during the actual duration of the consolidation. Once the project is abandoned, the five-year period resumes. Since the SAFER had already exceeded this period before 26 April 1988 (the plot dated from 1982), it could no longer conclude a precarious agreement. By signing on 21 September 1988, it violated the law, and the occupier was able to rely on a farm lease.

In other words, the SAFER cannot use the threat of a consolidation to indefinitely extend the precarious regime. As soon as the project is abandoned, the clock restarts. And if the total five-year period is exceeded, the occupier acquires the protection of the farm lease status.

What few people know is that this decision is part of a jurisprudential trend protecting farmers. The courts are vigilant to ensure that SAFERs do not abuse their dominant position to circumvent the rights of tenants.

What this changes for you — concretely

For owners who rent land through SAFER: know that if the SAFER transfers a plot to you after having occupied it precariously, the occupier in place could have a farm lease that is binding on you. You will not be able to evict them easily. Example: in Périgueux, an owner bought a plot from SAFER in 1990, but the occupier had been there since 1985 under a precarious agreement. When the owner wanted to recover the land, the court recognised a farm lease in favour of the occupier, requiring the owner to pay him an eviction compensation of €15,000.

For farmers: if you occupy SAFER land for more than five years and the consolidation has been abandoned, you can request the reclassification of your agreement into a farm lease. This entitles you to renewal of the lease, compensation in the event of eviction, and operational stability. However, be careful: you must take legal action to have this right recognised. undefined, I have encountered cases where the farmer waited too long and was met with the statute of limitations (5-year period to act).

For purchasers of SAFER land: before buying, check the status of the occupier. Do not rely on the mere mention of "precarious agreement" in the deed. If the occupier has been in place for more than five years without consolidation, they might have a farm lease. Concrete example: in Langon, an investor bought a 5-hectare plot in 1995. The occupier had been there since 1988 under a precarious agreement. The investor had to deal with a 9-year farm lease, reducing the profitability of his investment.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Check the date of SAFER's acquisition: if more than five years have elapsed since SAFER's purchase and the consolidation has been abandoned, the precarious agreement is likely void. Consult a specialised lawyer to assert your rights.
• Request the communication of the consolidation file: the municipality must prove that a project was ongoing. If it cannot, the suspension of the five-year period is unjustified. Gather evidence (deliberations, letters).
• Do not sign a new precarious agreement without advice: if SAFER offers to renew, ask your lawyer to analyse the situation. A signature may be interpreted as a waiver of your rights.
• Act quickly: the time limit to challenge a precarious agreement and request a farm lease is five years from the signature. After this period, you risk losing your rights. Seize the agricultural lease tribunal at the first signs of conflict.

Further reading: related case law and developments

This 1995 decision was reinforced by a subsequent Supreme Court judgment of 13 March 2008 (No. 07-12.456), which specified that SAFER cannot use successive precarious agreements to circumvent the farm lease status if it has no real development project. The judges examine the substance of the consolidation project. If it is fictitious, the farm lease is automatically recognised.

On the other hand, the Supreme Court has accepted that SAFER may conclude precarious agreements of less than five years, even after the expiry of the period, if a new consolidation project is initiated. However, be cautious: the courts are strict on the evidence of the project. A simple municipal resolution may not suffice.

The trend is therefore towards protecting farmers against abuses of dominant position by SAFERs. The judges verify that the precarious agreement is genuinely justified by imminent land development. In doubt, they reclassify it as a farm lease.

In practice: what to do

FAQ

Q: Can I request a farm lease if I occupy SAFER land for more than 5 years without a written agreement?
A: Yes, if you prove that the occupation is continuous and that SAFER has no consolidation project. You must seize the agricultural lease tribunal to have the existence of a verbal lease recognised.

Q: What is the time limit to act?
A: You have five years from the signature of the last precarious agreement or, failing an agreement, from the start of the occupation. After this period, you risk the statute of limitations.

Q: How much does a procedure cost?
A: Lawyer fees vary between €1,500 and €5,000 depending on complexity. Court costs (bailiff, expert) may be added. But an eviction compensation can amount to several years of rent.

Q: Can SAFER terminate my agreement immediately if it wants to sell?
A: No, if you have a farm lease, SAFER must respect the notice period (18 months) and pay you eviction compensation if it sells to a third party. Without a lease, it can terminate with 3 months' notice.

Q: What should I do if SAFER offers me a new precarious agreement after 5 years?
A: Do not sign it without consulting a lawyer. This signature could be interpreted as a waiver of your rights. Instead, request a judicial reclassification.

Are you in a similar situation? A 30-minute initial consultation with Maître Zakine (€45) can save you months of proceedings — and often much more. Book an appointment →