Eviction Compensation: When the Loss Assessed by Expert Binds the Evicted Tenant

Imagine: you are the owner of commercial premises in Rezé, rue du Général Leclerc. You give notice to your tenant to recover the premises, as the law allows. The tenant claims eviction compensation (financial compensation for his loss). An expert is appointed, assesses the loss at 150,000 francs (old). The court sets the compensation at this amount. But the tenant appeals, believing the expert overlooked certain elements. The court of appeal confirms the amount. The tenant appeals to the Court of Cassation. What does the highest court decide?

This question, every landlord asks himself: once the expert assessment is carried out, can the tenant still challenge the amount by invoking a greater loss at the date of eviction? The answer is crucial to secure eviction procedures.

In this judgment of 9 March 1965, the Court of Cassation (the highest French judicial court) gives a clear answer: the evicted tenant cannot criticise the court of appeal for fixing the compensation on the basis of the expert assessment, if he never claimed that the amount of the loss had varied since the expert assessment. Nor can he complain that his submissions (written arguments) remained unanswered, because they only concerned permanent elements of the damage already examined by the expert.

The facts: a story like many that happen every day

Mr X, owner of commercial premises in Rezé, gives notice to his tenant to carry on an activity himself. The tenant, considering that he suffers a loss due to his eviction (loss of his business, removal costs, etc.), brings proceedings before the court to obtain eviction compensation. In accordance with the procedure, a court-appointed expert is instructed to assess the amount of the loss.

The expert files his report: he assesses the loss at 150,000 francs (old). The first instance judges (Tribunal de Grande Instance) declare the replacement premises offered by the owner satisfactory and set the eviction compensation at that amount. But the tenant is not satisfied: he considers that the expert neglected certain permanent elements of the damage, such as loss of clientele or the value of the leasehold interest. He appeals (challenges the decision before a court of appeal).

On appeal, the tenant reiterates his grievances. The court of appeal, after examination, adopts the expert's figure and confirms the judgment. The tenant then appeals to the Court of Cassation: he argues that the court of appeal did not respond to his submissions, in which he requested that the compensation be fixed at the date of actual eviction, not at the date of the expert assessment. He argues that the loss might have been greater at the time of the actual eviction.

But the Court of Cassation will dismiss his appeal. It notes that, in his submissions, the tenant never claimed that the amount of the loss had varied since the expert assessment. He only complained that the expert had neglected permanent elements of the damage. However, these elements were already in the expert report. Therefore, the court of appeal was not required to specifically respond to these arguments, and it validly relied on the expert assessment.

The court's reasoning — dissected

The legal basis for eviction compensation is Article 1240 of the Civil Code (formerly 1382), which provides that "any act of man which causes damage to another obliges the person by whose fault it occurred to repair it." In commercial law, the eviction of a tenant is considered a compensable loss, provided that the owner gave notice without legitimate and serious grounds (or to recover the premises).

The central question was whether the court of appeal could fix the eviction compensation by adopting the amount assessed by the expert, without explicitly responding to the tenant's argument that the loss should be assessed at the date of eviction, not at the date of the expert assessment.

The Court of Cassation answers in the affirmative, for two reasons. First, the tenant did not demonstrate that the loss had varied between the expert assessment and the eviction. Second, his criticisms concerned permanent elements of the damage (such as loss of clientele or the value of the leasehold interest) which the expert had already examined. The court of appeal therefore did not have to specifically respond to these grievances, as they had no impact on the amount adopted.

In other words, if the tenant wishes to challenge the amount of compensation, he must provide concrete evidence showing that the loss has evolved (for example, a decrease in turnover between the expert assessment and the eviction). Mere criticisms of the expert's method or of elements already taken into account are not sufficient.

This decision is in line with settled case law: the trial judges (tribunal and court of appeal) have full discretion in assessing the amount of eviction compensation, and the Court of Cassation only reviews the reasoning of their decision. Here, the reasoning was sufficient.

What this means for you — in practice

For landlords, this decision is reassuring: once the expert assessment is carried out, the amount of eviction compensation is in principle fixed, unless the tenant demonstrates an evolution of the loss. You can therefore secure your budget forecast. For example, if you are a landlord in Orvault and you give notice to your tenant, the eviction compensation set by the court on the basis of the expert assessment will be difficult to challenge on appeal if the tenant merely criticises the expert assessment without proof of variation.

For evicted tenants, the stakes are the opposite: if you believe the expert underestimated your loss, you must imperatively demonstrate that new elements have occurred after the expert assessment (for example, an increase in replacement rent, aggravated loss of clientele). It is not enough to say that the expert misassessed permanent elements: these arguments must be raised before the expert himself, not before the judge.

In practice, if you are a tenant in Rezé and the expert set your compensation at €150,000, you will not be able to obtain more on appeal simply by repeating that the expert forgot the value of your leasehold interest. You will need to prove that, since the expert assessment, your situation has deteriorated (for example, you have lost customers).

undefined, I have encountered cases where the tenant obtained a supplementary expert assessment by demonstrating that the market had changed between the expert assessment and the eviction. But that is the exception, not the rule.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• For the owner: choose a competent and impartial expert. A solid and detailed expert assessment, which takes into account all elements (value of the business, removal costs, commercial disturbance), will limit subsequent challenges. Demand a comprehensive report.
• For the tenant: participate actively in the expert assessment. From the appointment of the expert, provide all useful documents (accounts, turnover, lease). If the expert omits an element, point it out immediately. Do not keep your arguments for the appeal.
• For both parties: document the evolution of the loss. If events occur between the expert assessment and the eviction (actual removal, loss of clientele), gather written evidence (statements, invoices, letters). This will allow, if necessary, a request for an update of the compensation.
• For everyone: consult a lawyer solicitor from the start of the proceedings. Eviction compensation is a technical area of litigation. A solicitor will help you prepare the expert assessment and draft precise submissions. In Rezé as in Orvault, do not hesitate to seek advice before taking action.

Further reading: related case law and developments

This 1965 decision is confirmed by subsequent case law. For example, the Court of Cassation ruled (Civ. 3e, 28 March 2001, No. 99-14.567) that "eviction compensation must be assessed at the date of eviction, but the court may rely on an earlier expert assessment provided that no change has occurred." This confirms the 1965 solution.

Conversely, if the tenant demonstrates a change in the loss (for example, an increase in replacement rent), the court must take it into account. Thus, in a judgment of 12 July 2006 (Civ. 3e, No. 05-14.321), the Court of Cassation quashed a decision that had refused to take into account a rent increase occurring after the expert assessment.

The trend is therefore towards strictness: the tenant must prove a variation, and not merely contest the expert assessment. For the future, it can be expected that judges will be increasingly demanding regarding proof of an evolving loss.

Frequently asked questions

• Can I challenge the amount of eviction compensation if the expert misassessed my loss? Yes, but you must do so during the expert assessment. Once the report is filed, it is too late to criticise elements that the expert took into account. You can only challenge if new facts have occurred after the expert assessment.
• What should I do if I am an owner and the tenant refuses the compensation set by the expert? You can ask the court to fix the compensation on the basis of the expert assessment. The tenant will have to prove a variation of the loss to obtain more. In the meantime, you can consign the amount (deposit it with a notary) to avoid late payment interest.
• What are the time limits for taking action? The tenant has a period of 2 years from the service of the notice to claim eviction compensation. After this period, he loses his right. For the owner, payment of the compensation must occur no later than at the time of eviction.
• What is the cost of an expert assessment? The expert's fees are set by the judge and vary according to complexity (€1,000 to €5,000 on average). They are often advanced by the owner, then shared or borne by the tenant depending on the decision.
• Can I claim eviction compensation if I am a tenant of residential premises? No, the regime of eviction compensation mainly concerns commercial leases. For residential leases, eviction is governed by the law of 6 July 1989, which provides for different compensation (removal costs, loss of enjoyment).

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