Seasonal or Commercial Lease? When Tolerance Does Not Create a Right to Renewal

Imagine: you are a property owner in Yvetot, you let a small premises to a trader for the summer season. The contract is clear: letting from 1 April to 30 September. But the tenant, once the season is over, leaves his goods in the premises. You turn a blind eye, for convenience. A few years pass, and now your tenant is claiming a commercial lease with a right to renewal! Is this possible? The Court of Cassation answers: no, if the parties' agreement leaves no doubt as to the seasonal nature of the letting, mere tolerance does not open the door to the protective status of commercial leases. This 1972 decision remains a reference for all owners and tenants of seasonal premises.

Because the question is crucial: at what point does a seasonal letting become a commercial lease? Many owners, particularly on the Normandy coast, in Fécamp or elsewhere, let premises in the summer without suspecting that they could, one day, find themselves with a tenant who cannot be evicted. The law on commercial leases is full of pitfalls. This decision of 21 March 1972, handed down by the Court of Cassation, provides a welcome clarification: tolerance is not a right.

So, what can you do to protect your property? And you, tenant, what are your actual rights? Let us delve into this case, which, although more than 50 years old, still sheds light on today's disputes.

The Facts: A Story Like Many Others

Mr X, a property owner in Yvetot, lets a premises to Mr Y, an itinerant trader, for the summer period. The contract, signed each year, specifies "seasonal letting" and "fixed term". For several years, Mr Y runs his souvenir business and, at the end of the season, leaves some goods in the premises. Mr X says nothing, out of tolerance. But one day, Mr Y refuses to leave the premises at the end of the season, invoking the status of commercial leases (Articles L.145-1 et seq. of the Commercial Code). He considers that, since he stores his goods all year round, he has a permanent operation and therefore a right to renewal of his lease.

Mr X brings the matter before the Tribunal d'Instance of Rouen, which rules in summary proceedings. The summary judge (a judge who decides urgent matters) must decide whether the challenge raised by Mr Y is "serious" or not. If it is serious, he must refer the case to the full hearing; otherwise, he may order eviction. The judge considers that the challenge is not serious: the terms of the contract are clear, the letting is seasonal, and the storage of goods is merely a tolerance. He orders eviction. Mr Y appeals. The Court of Appeal of Rennes upholds the judgment. Mr Y appeals to the Court of Cassation.

Before the Court of Cassation, Mr Y argues that the summary judge could not decide a question of substance: the intention of the parties, the reality of the permanent operation. The High Court dismisses his appeal. It holds that the summary judge was entitled to find that the challenge was not serious, since the parties' agreement left no doubt as to the seasonal nature of the letting, and the possibility of storing goods all year round constituted a mere tolerance.

The Reasoning of the Court — Explained

The Court of Cassation relies on Article 808 of the Code of Civil Procedure (old), which allows the summary judge to grant an interim payment or order a protective measure "in cases where the existence of the obligation is not seriously contestable". In essence, the summary judge cannot decide a complex dispute: he can only intervene if one of the parties does not seriously contest the obligation. Here, was the tenant seriously contesting? No, according to the Court, because the contract was clear.

The reasoning is as follows: the benefit of the legislation on commercial leases requires an actual and permanent operation in premises let for commercial use. However, a seasonal letting, by its very nature temporary, does not meet this condition. The fact that the tenant stores goods all year round — which the landlord tolerates — does not change the nature of the contract. Tolerance is not equivalent to a right. In law, tolerance is a mere act of kindness, which does not create rights for the beneficiary (unless it turns into acquisitive prescription, but that is not the case here).

This decision is not a reversal of precedent: it confirms a consistent position. As early as 1972, the Court of Cassation refused to extend the status of commercial leases to seasonal lettings, even if the tenant exceeds the contractual limits with the tacit agreement of the landlord. The trial judges (tribunals and courts of appeal) must look for the common intention of the parties, but if the contract is clear, they can simply apply it. Here, the Court of Appeal of Rennes had noted that the terms "provisional" and "seasonal" used in the documents demonstrated the parties' intention not to create a commercial lease.

In practice, this decision gives a powerful tool to landlords: in the event of a dispute, they can ask the summary judge to order eviction if the contract is clear, without waiting months or years of full proceedings. But be careful: if the contract is ambiguous, the summary judge will refer the case to the full hearing, and the landlord will have to wait.

What This Means for You — In Practice

For the landlord: you can sleep easy if your tenancy agreement is clearly seasonal. Even if you tolerate your tenant leaving goods out of season, this does not give them a right to renewal. However, be vigilant: if the tolerance lasts for years and you do not react, the tenant could argue a verbal lease or prescription. Make sure to formalise each letting with a written contract and remind the tenant each year of the seasonal nature. Example: in Fécamp, a landlord lets a 30 m² premises to a crêpe seller for the summer season (June to September) at €800 per month. He tolerates the trader storing his equipment in winter. One day, the trader refuses to leave. Thanks to this case law, the landlord can obtain his eviction in summary proceedings.

For the tenant: you cannot rely on the status of commercial leases if your contract is seasonal, even if you occupy the premises all year round with the landlord's tacit agreement. However, if the contract is ambiguous or if the landlord led you to believe that the letting was permanent (for example, by accepting an annual rent), you might have a serious challenge. In that case, the summary judge cannot decide and the case will go to the full hearing, where you can argue your right to renewal. But the chances are slim if the contract clearly states "seasonal".

For the buyer of a let premises: before buying, check the nature of the existing leases. A seasonal lease does not confer a right to renewal, allowing you to recover the premises more easily. But beware of tolerances: if the tenant has occupied the premises all year round for several years, they might argue a commercial lease. Have a diagnosis carried out by a lawyer.

For the co-owner: if your co-ownership includes commercial premises, ensure that the leases comply with the co-ownership regulations. A seasonal letting may be prohibited by the regulations. In that case, the managing agent can take action.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Draft a clear and unambiguous contract: expressly mention "seasonal letting", "fixed term", and specify the exact dates. Avoid vague terms like "temporary letting". State that the tenant must vacate the premises at the end of the period, without automatic renewal.
• Do not tolerate occupation outside the period: if the tenant leaves goods after the end date, send them a formal notice by registered letter to remove them. If you accept, do so by a written addendum stating that it is an exceptional tolerance and not a right.
• Have an inventory of fixtures signed at each entry and exit: this proves the reality of the seasonal occupation. In the event of a dispute, this element is decisive to show that the occupation is not permanent.
• Consult a specialist lawyer before signing: a professional can check that your contract complies with the rules and advise you on the clauses to include. In Yvetot as in Fécamp, local specificities (tourist influx, pressured areas) can influence the classification of the lease. An investment of a few hundred euros can save you years of litigation.

Further Reading: Related Case Law and Developments

This 1972 decision is part of a consistent line of authority. Already, in a judgment of 27 November 1968 (No. 67-11.456), the Court of Cassation had held that a seasonal letting could not give rise to a right to renewal, even if the lessee operated a business. More recently, the Court recalled that the status of commercial leases is a matter of public policy, but it only applies to lettings of premises used for the operation of a business, which excludes seasonal lettings (Civ. 3e, 14 January 2016, No. 14-27.853).

The trend is therefore towards maintaining a strict line: no commercial status for seasonal lettings, unless the contract is fraudulent or the parties actually agreed a disguised commercial lease. The trial judges are invited to look for the real intention of the parties, but in the case of a clear contract, they must adhere to it.

For the future, the question could arise with the development of tourist lettings like Airbnb. If a landlord lets a premises to a trader for a few months each year, with a tolerance for storage, could the tenant claim a commercial lease? The answer is probably no, but caution: better to formalise things.

Key Points to Remember

• Question: Can a seasonal letting become a commercial lease if the tenant occupies the premises all year round with the landlord's agreement?
  Answer: No, if the contract is clearly seasonal. The landlord's tolerance is not a right.
• Question: What should I do if my tenant refuses to leave after the season?
  Answer: You can apply to the summary judge for eviction if the contract leaves no doubt. A lawyer is strongly recommended.
• Question: Can I claim a commercial lease if I have occupied a premises for several years, even with a seasonal contract?
  Answer: This is very risky. The judge will consider that you accepted the terms of the contract. Only fraud or a subsequent modification of the contract could help you.
• Question: What are the time limits for taking action?
  Answer: In summary proceedings, eviction can be ordered within a few weeks. At full hearing, the trial can last one to two years. The cost varies from €1,000 to €5,000 depending on complexity.
• Question: Does this case law apply to seasonal lettings of residential premises?
  Answer: No, it concerns commercial premises. For residential lettings, the rules for residential leases (law of 1989) apply.

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 →