Agricultural Lease: Unauthorised Works – When Can the Landlord Act?

You own an agricultural plot in Billère, leased to a farmer for ten years. One morning, you discover that your tenant has built a shed without your consent, and worse, has altered the drainage, causing waterlogging that damages the crops. The question burns on your lips: can I force him to restore everything immediately? The answer, counter-intuitive, is no. But then, what can a landlord do? The Court of Cassation has just ruled on this issue in a judgment of 14 December 2023 (n°22-20.257), recalling a rule that often baffles landlords: as long as the lease is running, it is impossible to obtain reinstatement; you must wait until the end of the contract to claim compensation. Analysis.

The Facts: A Story That Happens Every Day

Imagine Mr and Mrs V., owners of a farm in the vicinity of Bayonne. In 2010, they grant an agricultural lease to Mr X., a local farmer. The contract is standard: the tenant must farm the land as a prudent administrator and cannot carry out works without the landlord's consent. Yet in 2015, Mr X. decides, without informing anyone, to build a cattle shed and modify the drainage network. Result: the land becomes waterlogged, soil quality deteriorates. The landlords learn of this in 2018 and sue Mr X. before the rural leases tribunal to obtain reinstatement of the premises. The tribunal rules in their favour in 2020, ordering the tenant to demolish the structures and restore the original drainage. But Mr X. appeals. The Court of Appeal of Caen, in a judgment of 16 June 2022, sets aside the judgment: it holds that reinstatement cannot be ordered during the term of the lease, because the works are old and the landlord can only claim compensation at the end of the lease. The landlords appeal to the Court of Cassation. The Court of Cassation, on 14 December 2023, dismisses their appeal and confirms the position of the Court of Appeal. The reasoning is straightforward: articles L. 411-28 and L. 411-72 of the Rural and Maritime Fishing Code (CRPM) distinguish two moments. Article L. 411-28 prohibits the tenant from carrying out unauthorised works, but does not provide for a specific sanction during the lease term. In contrast, article L. 411-72 allows the landlord, upon expiry of the lease, to claim compensation for damage caused by unauthorised works. The Court specifies that this compensation is the only available remedy, not immediate reinstatement.

The Reasoning of the Court — Analysed

Why did the judges block the claim for reinstatement? Their reasoning is based on a strict reading of the texts. Article L. 411-28 of the CRPM provides: "The tenant may not, without the landlord's authorisation, carry out works that would have the effect of changing the purpose or conditions of farming of the holding." This article sets out a prohibition, but it does not provide for a sanction in case of breach. In civil law, when a text prohibits an act without providing a sanction, one turns to the general law of liability (article 1240 of the Civil Code: "Any act whatever of man which causes damage to another obliges the person by whose fault it occurred to make reparation"). But here, the legislature has provided a specific sanction in article L. 411-72: "Upon expiry of the lease, the tenant who has carried out unauthorised works owes compensation to the landlord, calculated according to the deterioration of the holding." The Court of Cassation interprets this mechanism as exclusive of any other action during the lease term. Why? Because the agricultural lease is a long-term contract (minimum nine years, renewable). Allowing the landlord to demand reinstatement at any time would disrupt the agricultural operation, which needs stability. Moreover, the works, even if unauthorised, may have been useful or amortised; an indemnity at the end of the lease is fairer because it takes account of the state of the premises at that time. The Court of Cassation has already ruled in this sense, for example in a judgment of 29 September 2016 (n°15-20.341), where it held that reinstatement could only be ordered if the lease contained a specific penalty clause. In the absence of a clause, only the end-of-lease indemnity is possible. So this is not a reversal but a confirmation of well-established case law. The landlords in our case argued that the works had caused serious and immediate damage, justifying reinstatement. But the Court considered that the damage was not irreversible: it could be compensated by a sum of money at the end of the lease. In practice, the courts look at whether the works render the holding unfit for its agricultural purpose; if not, the indemnity suffices.

What This Changes for You — Practically

If you are a landlord, this decision requires patience. You cannot demand the demolition of a shed built without authorisation as long as the lease has not ended. However, upon expiry, you can claim compensation. For example, if the shed has reduced the value of the holding by €15,000 (according to an agricultural expert in Bayonne), you can obtain that sum, plus interest. But be careful: if you wait until the end of the lease, evidence may be harder to gather (photos, witness statements). So, as soon as you discover the works, have the damage recorded by a bailiff. For the tenant (lessee), this decision is reassuring: you do not risk eviction or demolition during the lease term, unless the contract contains a specific clause. But you risk a heavy indemnity at the end of the lease, and this may affect your right to renewal. The landlord can refuse renewal if the unauthorised works have changed the purpose of the holding. For a purchaser of the holding, caution: unauthorised works may reduce the value of the property, and the purchaser may be subrogated (substituted) to the landlord's rights to claim the indemnity. In practice, if you sell your farm, mention the existence of such works in the sale deed to avoid liability.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Insert a penalty clause in the lease: provide for a fixed sum in case of unauthorised works. This deters the tenant and allows you to take legal action without waiting for the end of the lease. Example: "Any unauthorised work shall incur a penalty of €5,000."
• Carry out a detailed inventory of fixtures at entry: with photos, videos, and if possible an agricultural expert. This will serve as a reference to prove later damage. In Billère, an inventory may cost €300, but it saves you years of litigation.
• Inspect your property regularly: visit the site at least once a year, without notice. If you discover suspicious works, have a bailiff record them immediately. The bailiff will draw up a report that is binding unless proven otherwise.
• In case of dispute, act quickly but strategically: do not demand reinstatement during the lease term (you would be dismissed). Instead, send a formal notice (registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt) reminding of the prohibition and demanding payment of a provisional indemnity or cessation of the works. If the tenant continues, you can claim damages for the damage already suffered.

Further Reading: Related Case Law and Developments

This decision is part of a consistent line of authority. Already in 2016, the Court of Cassation ruled (n°15-20.341) that reinstatement could not be ordered during the lease term, unless there was a contrary clause. A more recent judgment of 9 September 2021 (n°20-16.722) clarified that the end-of-lease indemnity must cover the entire damage, including the loss of market value of the holding. The trend is therefore clear: the legislature and the courts favour continuity of agricultural operations. In the future, landlords may become more vigilant in drafting leases and multiply penalty clauses. The courts may also be called upon to specify the calculation of the indemnity, particularly in cases where the works have improved the holding (as the tenant could then claim a betterment).

In Practice: What to Do

Checklist for a landlord discovering unauthorised works:

1. Record the facts: call a bailiff to draw up a descriptive and photographic report. Indicative cost: €200 to €400.
2. Send a formal notice to the tenant: send a registered letter with AR reminding him of his obligation not to modify the holding without authorisation, and demand the provision of a guarantee or payment of a provisional indemnity.
3. Estimate the damage: have an amicable expert assessment carried out by an agricultural expert (approx. €800 to €1,500) to quantify the deterioration of the holding.
4. Keep all evidence: photos, videos, invoices, witness statements. If the lease is to be renewed, you may oppose renewal on the grounds of unauthorised works.
5. Upon expiry of the lease: claim the indemnity under article L. 411-72. If the tenant refuses, apply to the rural leases tribunal within two years of the end of the lease (two-year limitation period).

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