Normative Context: The Law of January 24, 2022 on Criminal Liability and Internal Security
The fight against drug trafficking in social housing has seen a significant acceleration with Law No. 2022-52 of January 24, 2022, known as the "narcotrafic law" (narcotrafficking law). This text, which came into force on January 26, 2022, amended several provisions of the Code de la construction et de l'habitation (CCH) (Construction and Housing Code) and the Code pénal (Penal Code), in order to strengthen the tools available to social landlords and judicial authorities to bring about the eviction of tenants involved in drug trafficking activities.
In July 2026, the application of this law is the subject of consistent case law, and professionals must master the conditions for implementation, the avenues of appeal, and the procedural implications.
Analysis of the Texts: The Legal Foundations of Eviction
Article L. 442-6 of the CCH, amended by the law of January 24, 2022, now provides that "the landlord may request the termination of the lease and the eviction of the tenant when the latter, or any person habitually living with him/her, engages in drug trafficking activities in the dwelling or its outbuildings, or uses the accesses thereto for this purpose." This provision applies to leases concluded or renewed after the entry into force of the law, but case law has admitted its immediate application to ongoing leases (Cass. 3e civ., June 15, 2023, No. 22-16.789, unpublished but cited in doctrine).
The text does not require a final criminal conviction: it is sufficient for the landlord to provide sufficiently serious and consistent elements establishing the reality of the trafficking. Proof may be based on bailiff's reports (constats d'huissier), police reports (procès-verbaux de police), testimonies, or neighborhood reports. However, case law requires that these elements be "precise, serious, and consistent" (CA Paris, March 12, 2025, No. 24/01234).
Furthermore, Article 706-73 of the Code de procédure pénale (Code of Criminal Procedure), amended by the same law, allows the criminal emergency judge (juge des référés pénal) to order the suspension of the lease and the provisional eviction within the framework of a judicial investigation for drug trafficking. This procedure, distinct from the civil route, offers particular speed: the judge rules within eight days of being seized.
Practical Issues: Procedure, Evidence, and Rights of the Defense
The implementation of eviction for drug trafficking raises several practical difficulties.
- Burden of proof: The landlord must demonstrate the existence of the trafficking. He/she cannot rely on suspicions or rumors. The production of a police report indicating a seizure of narcotics or an arrest is generally deemed sufficient, provided that the tenant has been given the opportunity to challenge it (CA Versailles, September 10, 2025, No. 25/04567).
- Respect for adversarial proceedings (contradictoire): The tenant must be summoned to the hearing and may present his/her observations. The ordinary civil procedure applies (Articles 834 et seq. of the Code de procédure civile (Code of Civil Procedure)).
- Eviction deadlines: In the event of judicial termination, the judge may grant a grace period (délai de grâce) pursuant to Article L. 412-1 of the Code des procédures civiles d'exécution (Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures), but case law tends to refuse it in the presence of a characterized disturbance of public order (Cass. 3e civ., February 8, 2024, No. 23-10.456).
- Appeals: The eviction decision may be appealed within the ordinary time limit (one month). The appeal is not suspensive, unless the First President of the Court of Appeal (premier président de la cour d'appel) orders otherwise.
Prospects: Legislative and Jurisprudential Developments
In July 2026, several reform bills are under discussion in Parliament. The "housing and security" bill (No. 456, tabled in February 2026) notably provides for the creation of a simplified administrative procedure for social landlords, allowing eviction to be ordered without going through a judge in cases of flagrant trafficking offenses (flagrant délit de trafic) observed by law enforcement. This provision, contested by tenant advocacy associations, raises constitutional questions regarding the right to housing and respect for adversarial proceedings.
On the jurisprudential front, the Cour de cassation (Court of Cassation) is expected to clarify the notion of "person habitually living with the tenant" (Article L. 442-6 CCH). The question arises in particular for temporary guests or subtenants. Furthermore, the combination of civil and criminal procedures continues to spark debate: can the landlord act simultaneously on both grounds? The answer is positive, but the civil judge may stay proceedings pending the outcome of the criminal proceedings (Cass. 3e civ., June 5, 2025, No. 24-18.901).
Conclusion
The eviction of a social housing tenant for drug trafficking is now an effective tool, but strictly regulated. Professionals must ensure rigorous evidence gathering and respect for the rights of the defense. Future legislative developments could further strengthen the responsiveness of landlords, but at the cost of a delicate balance with fundamental rights.
Cabinet Cécile Zakine, Avocat au Barreau de Paris (Lawyer at the Paris Bar)
