Aller au contenu principal
Breach of Articles 23-6 and 23-3 of the Decree of 30 September 1953
Droit Immobilier

Breach of Articles 23-6 and 23-3 of the Decree of 30 September 1953

📅 Decision of 24 November 1999🔄 Updated on 12 October 2026⚖️ Cour de cassation👁️ 18 views📖 2 min read

A Court of Appeal breaches Articles 23-6 and 23-3 of the Decree of 30 September 1953 by allowing the landlord's request to fix the renewed lease rent outside the capping, holding that, although the action to readjust the principal rent is time-barred, the landlady may rely on the subletting that occurred during the expired lease, which constitutes a notable change in the respective obligations of the parties, whereas subletting, even unauthorised, does not constitute a modification of the elements referred to in Articles 23-1 to 23-4 of the aforementioned Decree.

Reference decision: Cass • N° 98-12.574 • 1999-11-24 • View decision →

This decision provides an important insight into your property law. Here is what it changes for you.

The situation

A Court of Appeal breaches Articles 23-6 and 23-3 of the Decree of 30 September 1953 by allowing the landlord's request to fix the renewed lease rent outside the capping, holding that, although the action to readjust the principal rent is time-barred, the landlady may rely on the subletting that occurred during the expired lease, which constitutes a notable change in the respective obligations of the parties, whereas subletting, even unauthorised, does not constitute a modification of the elements referred to in Articles 23-1 to 23-4 of the aforementioned Decree.

What the law says

This decision confirms the fundamental principles of property law.

Key takeaways

  • Strictly comply with statutory limitation periods for appeals
  • Keep all your supporting documents (title deeds, instruments, correspondence)
  • Anticipate: preventive advice is always cheaper than litigation

For an analysis of your situation: 30-minute 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: 98-12.574
  • Court: Cour de cassation
  • Decision of: 24 November 1999

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