The subletting not having had for

Application pratique:

According to the 1991 Court of Cassation decision, a simple residential sublet does not automatically bring the premises under the 1948 Act if it does not alter the overall commercial use. Check your lease: if it prohibits subletting, you may notify the tenant to cease and potentially seek termination. If the lease is silent, document the situation and consult a lawyer to confirm that the bookshop remains predominantly commercial, so the 1948 Act does not apply. Send a formal notice to the tenant to regularise or end the sublet within a set period.

Application pratique:

This case law clarifies that subletting part of commercial premises for residential use does not change its commercial character if the main activity remains. To protect yourself, obtain your landlord’s written consent (often required in commercial leases) rather than subletting covertly. If consent is refused, you can propose a draft sublease that explicitly maintains bakery use in the main area. Keep all correspondence. Should a dispute arise, this precedent supports that the sublet does not ipso facto transform the lease into a residential one under the 1948 Act, preserving your commercial tenancy.

Application pratique:

The Court of Cassation ruled that such subletting does not automatically invoke the 1948 Act’s protective regime. Your subtenancy may still be valid if the head lease permitted subletting or if the landlord tacitly condoned it. Request from the hairdresser a copy of the main lease to check subletting rights. Do not move out voluntarily; challenge any eviction notice by arguing that the premises remain commercial in essence, so the 1948 Act is not triggered, and your occupation does not harm the landlord’s interests beyond the breach. Seek legal advice to negotiate a direct lease or a reasonable notice period.