Rescheduling of rent debts: can eviction continue?

Imagine the scene: in Biarritz, a landlord, Mr Dupont, rents an apartment to a family who, following a life accident, accumulate several months of unpaid rent. Mr Dupont is understanding: he accepts a debt rescheduling plan, spread over 24 months. But the current rents are still not paid. Can he still request eviction? This is the question decided by this judgment of the Court of Cassation of 30 May 1995. In other words, does the rescheduling of a rent debt protect the tenant from any proceedings, including eviction? The answer is no, and it has concrete consequences for the hundreds of thousands of tenancies in France. In this article, we dissect this decision for you, landlords and tenants, so that you know exactly where you stand.

The facts: a story like many that happen every day

Mr and Mrs X, tenants in Hendaye, accumulate rent arrears. Their landlord grants them a rescheduling of the debt, i.e. a staggered payment plan. But difficulties persist: the current rents (those falling due each month) are not paid. The landlord then applies to the court for a declaration of termination of the tenancy (cancellation of the rental contract) and for the eviction of the tenants. Mr and Mrs X consider that the rescheduling blocks any eviction proceedings, since the eviction aims to recover the debt. The Court of Appeal of Pau agrees with them: it suspends the eviction, considering that the rescheduling prohibits any enforcement proceedings (procedure to obtain forced payment). The landlord appeals to the Court of Cassation. The case goes up to the Court of Cassation, which quashes the appeal judgment and remits the case. Moral: rescheduling is not an absolute shield against eviction.

The reasoning of the court — dissected

The Court of Cassation relies on Article 1244-1 of the Civil Code (now 1343-5 since 2016), which allows the judge to grant payment extensions. But it clarifies: these extensions only suspend enforcement proceedings aimed at recovering the debt (such as attachment of earnings or seizure of goods). However, they do not prevent the landlord from seeking termination of the tenancy and eviction, because these actions are not directly aimed at recovering the debt, but at ending the rental contract. In other words, rescheduling suspends enforcement measures against the tenant's assets, but not the eviction proceedings themselves. The Court of Appeal had therefore made a mistake: it had confused suspension of enforcement proceedings with suspension of the action for termination. This is a confirmation of previous case law: the Court of Cassation maintains a clear distinction between the debt and the contract. In plain terms, a tenant who obtains a rescheduling must continue to pay current rents and comply with his obligations, otherwise he risks eviction.

What this changes for you — concretely

If you are a landlord: you can accept a rescheduling without fearing that you will lose the possibility to evict in case of new arrears. For example, if your tenant in Hendaye owes €5,000, you accept a plan over 24 months, but he does not pay the January rent. You can then apply to the court to terminate the tenancy and request eviction, even though the rescheduling plan is ongoing. However, be careful: you must act quickly, because eviction is a lengthy procedure (averaging 6 to 12 months).

If you are a tenant: rescheduling gives you a reprieve, but it does not exempt you from paying current rents. If you cannot pay them, the landlord can request eviction, and the rescheduling plan will not protect you. undefined, I have come across cases where tenants thought they were safe after obtaining extensions, only to find themselves served with an eviction summons a few months later. Be vigilant: rescheduling is only a reprieve, not a definitive solution.

If you are a property professional (agent, property manager): inform your landlord clients that granting payment extensions does not block eviction. You can advise them to combine both: accept a rescheduling plan while initiating termination proceedings if current rents are not paid. This is a risk management strategy for rental property.

Four tips to avoid this type of dispute

• Draft a written addendum to the tenancy: when you grant a rescheduling, formalise it in writing with a precise schedule and a clause stating that failure to pay a single instalment triggers the forfeiture of the term (i.e. the entire debt becomes immediately payable).
• Require payment of current rents as a priority: in the addendum, provide that payments are first applied to current rents, then to arrears. Thus, if the tenant pays partially, you are sure that the current debt does not increase.
• Closely monitor compliance with the plan: at the first payment incident, send a formal notice (registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt) and, if necessary, initiate eviction proceedings without delay. Do not let several months of arrears accumulate.
• Consult a lawyer lawyer before granting a rescheduling: each situation is unique. A lawyer can advise you on the best strategy: judicial rescheduling (before the judge) or amicable, and on the clauses to include to protect your rights.

Besoin d'un conseil personnalisé ? Contactez Maître Zakine — première consultation 30 min à 45€.

Further reading: related case law and developments

This decision is part of a consistent line of the Court of Cassation. Already in 1992 (Civ. 2e, 13 May 1992, n°90-19.231), the Court had held that grace periods (suspension of payment) do not prevent termination of the tenancy. More recently, in 2019 (Civ. 3e, 10 October 2019, n°18-20.183), it recalled that the granting of payment extensions does not prevent the enforcement of the forfeiture clause (automatic termination of the tenancy) if the tenant does not pay current rents. The trend is therefore clear: judges protect the landlord's right to obtain eviction in case of non-compliance with rental obligations, even in the presence of a rescheduling. For the future, landlords can be reassured: as long as the tenant does not pay current rents, eviction remains possible, regardless of the staggering of arrears.

Frequently asked questions

1. Does rescheduling suspend eviction?
No, rescheduling only suspends enforcement proceedings for recovering the debt (such as seizure), but not the eviction proceedings themselves.

2. Can I evict a tenant who complies with the rescheduling plan but does not pay current rents?
Yes, because non-payment of current rents is a ground for termination of the tenancy independent of the rescheduled debt.

3. What are the time limits for taking eviction action?
Once a notice to pay has been served (official document giving the tenant 2 months to pay), if the tenant does not pay or does not comply with the plan, you can apply to the court. The eviction procedure generally takes 6 to 12 months, depending on the court.

4. What should I do if I am a tenant and cannot pay my current rents despite the rescheduling?
Contact your landlord quickly to renegotiate a new plan, or apply to the judge for civil protection to request new extensions. But do not remain passive: eviction can be avoided if you show good faith.

5. Is a judicial rescheduling more protective than an amicable rescheduling?
A judicial rescheduling (ordered by the judge) has the same scope as an amicable rescheduling: it suspends enforcement proceedings, but not eviction. The difference is that the judge can set precise terms and the plan has executory force, which secures both parties.

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