Reference Decision: cc • No. 12-17.914 • 2013-07-03 • View the decision →
Imagine: you are the owner of commercial premises in Marseille, in the Joliette district. Your tenant, a clothing boutique, gives you notice (i.e., terminates the lease) for 31 March 2010, whereas the lease provides for an expiry date of 28 February 2013. You ask yourself: is this notice valid? On what date does the lease terminate? This situation, more common than one might think, was decided by the Court of Cassation in a judgment of 3 July 2013 (No. 12-17.914).
The question is simple: when a commercial lease reaches its term and the tenant remains in the premises without a new contract, this is referred to as tacit renewal (automatic extension). In such a case, the law requires that notice be given for the last day of a calendar quarter (31 March, 30 June, 30 September, 31 December). But what if the tenant gives notice before the end of the lease, on a date that corresponds neither to a calendar quarter nor to the contractual expiry date? The Court of Cassation answers: this notice is not void; it takes effect on the next contractual expiry date, provided that the notice period (6 months) is observed.
This judgment is essential for all landlords and tenants of commercial leases. It clarifies a rule that is often misunderstood and avoids unjustified nullities. Let us delve into the details.
The Facts: A Story That Happens Every Day
The company Erteco is the owner of commercial premises leased to the company Arvato. The lease was renewed as from 1 March 2007 for a period of 6 years, i.e., until 28 February 2013. During the term of the lease, on 31 August 2009, the company Arvato gave notice to its landlord for 31 March 2010, i.e., approximately 6 months after the notification (6 months' notice), but on a date that is neither a calendar quarter nor the contractual expiry date.
The company Erteco contests this: in its view, the notice should have taken effect at the earliest on 28 February 2013 (the end of the lease) or, if Article L.145-9 of the Commercial Code is applied, on the last day of a calendar quarter. It therefore brings the matter before the court to have the effective date of the notice determined. The company Arvato, for its part, maintains that the notice is valid and that the lease terminates on 31 March 2010.
The Court of Appeal rules in favour of the tenant: the notice is valid and takes effect on 31 March 2010. The landlord appeals to the Court of Cassation. The Court of Cassation dismisses the appeal and upholds the judgment of the Court of Appeal. It specifies that Article L.145-9, which imposes the last day of the calendar quarter, applies only in cases of tacit renewal of the lease, i.e., when the lease continues beyond its initial term. In this case, the notice was given before the contractual expiry date, so the matter remains within the framework of the contract: the notice must comply with the terms of the lease, and if it is given on a date other than the expiry date, it is not void for that reason; it takes effect on the next contractual expiry date, provided that the 6-month notice period is observed.
The Reasoning of the Court — Analysed
The Court of Cassation relies on Article L.145-9 of the Commercial Code, in its wording resulting from the Law of 4 August 2008. This provision states that "notice must be given by extrajudicial act, at least six months in advance. It must be given for the last day of the calendar quarter." The Court specifies that this rule of the last day of the calendar quarter concerns only cases where the lease is extended by tacit renewal (i.e., when the tenant remains after the expiry date without a new contract).
Conversely, when notice is given during the contractual term of the lease, the parties remain free to determine the effective date of the notice in accordance with the terms of the contract. If the notice is given for a date that is not a quarterly expiry date, it is not void. It takes effect on the nearest contractual expiry date, provided that the six-month notice period is observed.
In this case, the contract provided for an expiry date of 28 February 2013. Notice was given on 31 August 2009 for 31 March 2010, i.e., with a notice period of 7 months (greater than 6 months). The date of 31 March 2010 was not a contractual expiry date, but the Court held that the notice was valid and took effect on that date, because there was no tacit renewal and the notice period was sufficient. In short, the judges favoured the tenant's clear intention to vacate the premises, rather than penalising a procedural error.
This reasoning is logical: the rule of the calendar quarter was created to protect the landlord in the event of automatic renewal, in order to prevent the tenant from leaving at any time. But when the lease is
Besoin d'un conseil personnalisé ? Contactez Maître Zakine — première consultation 30 min à 45€.
