Aller au contenu principal
Does not constitute an emphyteutic lease
Droit Immobilier

Does not constitute an emphyteutic lease

📅 Decision of 03 October 1991🔄 Updated on 5 October 2026⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 18 views📖 2 min read

A long-term lease does not constitute an emphyteutic lease where the modest rent is only relative and does not have as its consideration the undertaking of improvements by the tenant, where the building permit is limited to one room and all other development is prohibited, where the freedom to sublet or assign the lease is greatly diminished by a clause making the tenant jointly and severally liable with the assignee or subtenant, and where the possibility of carrying on other businesses is not general.

Reference decision: cc • No. 90-15.889 • 1991-10-03 • View decision →

This decision sheds important light on your property rights. Here is what it means for you.

The situation

A long-term lease does not constitute an emphyteutic lease where the modest rent is only relative and does not have as its consideration the undertaking of improvements by the tenant, where the building permit is limited to one room and all other development is prohibited, where the freedom to sublet or assign the lease is greatly diminished by a clause making the tenant jointly and severally liable with the assignee or subtenant, and where the possibility of carrying on other businesses is not general.

What the law says

This decision confirms the fundamental principles of property law.

Points to remember

  • Strictly observe the statutory time limits for appeals
  • Keep all your supporting documents (title deeds, contracts, correspondence)
  • Anticipate: preventive advice always costs less than litigation

For an analysis of your situation: 30-min consultation at €45 with Maître Zakine.

📌 Does this apply to your situation? Maître Cécile Zakine, French real estate lawyer, practises throughout France.
→ Prendre RDV pour une consultation droit du travail  |  → Browse all our legal articles

Legal information

  • Number: 90-15.889
  • Court: Cour de cassation
  • Decision of: 03 October 1991

Keywords

droit immobilierjurisprudenceimmobilier
Maître Cécile Zakine

About the author

Maître Cécile Zakine — Lawyer at the Alpes-Maritimes Bar, Doctor of Law. Every article in this magazine is based on the analysis of a real court decision, commented and put into perspective by Maître Zakine’s team.

Book an appointment →

Disclaimer: The analysis presented on this site is for informational purposes only and does not constitute personalised legal advice. For advice tailored to your situation, contact a qualified lawyer.

★★★★★4.9/5 — Google Reviews

Does this affect you?

Consult Maître Zakine — lawyer, Doctor of Law. Fast, clear answer.

Book a consultation →

🔒 Confidential · No obligation

📬 Get legal updates

One legal analysis per week, straight to your inbox. Free, no spam.

🔒 1-click unsubscribe · GDPR compliant

★★★★★4.9/5 — Avis Google

Maître Zakine, Doctor of Law

Phone and video consultations available — Fast appointments

Book an appointment
First consultation 30 minutes — €45

🔒 Confidentiel • Sans engagement • Réponse rapide