Aller au contenu principal
Repossession of a Dwelling: The Landlord Does Not Have to Prove the Beneficiary's Need
Droit-immobilier

Repossession of a Dwelling: The Landlord Does Not Have to Prove the Beneficiary's Need

📅 Decision of 06 November 1986🔄 Updated on 18 October 2026⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 34 views📖 1 min read

The Court of Cassation has ruled that a landlord who gives notice to a tenant to repossess the dwelling for the benefit of a relative does not have to demonstrate that the relative actually needs the dwelling. This decision provides security for landlords but requires precise justification in the notice from the outset.

Reference Decision: cc • No. 85-14.476 • 1986-11-06 • View decision →

Imagine: you are the owner of a flat in Danjoutin, let for years to a family. Your daughter, who works in Belfort, is looking for a home. You offer her this flat. You give notice to the tenant in due form, stating that you are repossessing the flat for your daughter. But the tenant challenges this: "What is the point of knowing for whom you are repossessing if you cannot prove that she needs this flat?"

This is the question that hundreds of landlords ask themselves every year. Must they demonstrate that the beneficiary of the repossession is in need? Does the beneficiary lack housing? The Court of Cassation decided in 1986: no. Article 9 of the Law of 22 June 1982 does not require the landlord to justify the beneficiary's housing need. Explanations.

📌 Does this apply to your situation? Maître Cécile Zakine, French real estate lawyer, practises throughout France.
→ Avocat droit immobilier & baux  |  → Browse all our legal articles

Legal information

  • Number: 85-14.476
  • Court: Cour de cassation
  • Decision of: 06 November 1986

Keywords

reprise logementcongé bailleurbesoin bénéficiaireloi 1982Cour de cassation

Practical use cases

1

Landlord wanting to house his child in Danjoutin

Mr. Dupont, owner of a flat in Danjoutin, gives notice to his tenant in order to install his daughter who works in Belfort. The tenant challenges this, arguing that the daughter does not need this flat since she still lives with her parents.

Practical application:

This decision confirms that Mr. Dupont does not have to prove his daughter's need. He must simply have given a motivated notice with the name of the beneficiary. The tenant cannot obtain cancellation of the notice on this ground alone.

2

Tenant challenging a repossession notice in Delle

Mrs. Martin, a tenant in Delle, receives a notice from her landlord who is repossessing the flat for his nephew. She suspects fraud because the nephew already lives elsewhere. She takes the matter to court.

Practical application:

Mrs. Martin will have to prove that the nephew does not actually occupy the flat after the repossession. The mere fact that he has another home is not enough. The court may verify actual occupation within two years.

3

Purchaser of a building wishing to repossess a flat

An investor buys a building in Belfort and wishes to house his son there. He gives notice to the existing tenant. The tenant challenges this, claiming that the son does not need the flat because he is a soldier and often away on deployment.

Practical application:

The purchaser can validly repossess the flat for his son without having to demonstrate his need. The only condition is that the son actually occupies the flat for two years, even if he is sometimes absent for work.

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