Adagio Charras: eviction costs

Tourist residence: Eviction compensation for Adagio Charras

Rejection of Pierre et Vacances’ claim to ignore 2020 and 2021

The interim relief judge of the Nanterre court confirms that the years 2020 and 2021 must be taken into account when calculating the eviction compensation claimed by Pierre et Vacances for the tourist residence, a former student residence at the end of the lease:

“In its written submissions at the hearing, PV CP CITY, without contesting the expert’s report in principle, requested that the years 2020 and 2021 be excluded from the scope of the expert’s assignment, on the grounds that they were not representative of the normal operating conditions of the business in light of the administrative measures taken as part of the Covid-19 health crisis.”

Compensation for eviction must be calculated at the time when the loss is incurred, i.e. either on the date of eviction or on the date when the tenant ceases to occupy the premises on a regular basis. The value of the business assets must be assessed on the date on which the courts rule when eviction has not yet occurred (Com. 30 June 1959, Bull. civ. III, no 292; Civ. 3e, 24 Nov. 2004, no 03-14.620), it being noted that the value of the business must be determined on the basis of the lessees’ last three years’ turnover before the eviction (Civ. 3e, 20 March 2007, no 06-11.040).

With regard to the assignment, although the defendant argues that the years 2020 and 2021 are not representative of its business in terms of the measures taken to manage the health crisis, it does not specify the measures to which it refers or their impact, and it does not submit any documents to the court to support the alleged effects, even though the scope of the expert’s assignment is disputed and consequently the elements put forward in its defence cannot be taken for granted. Consequently, there is no reason to exclude the last two years of activity from the mission entrusted to the expert.

(Judgment of 25 May 2022 No. RG 22/00259)

It will be recalled that the Cour de Cassation stated in a clear statement that the unpaid rents in 2020 and 2021 by Pierre et Vacances and the other operators were due:

“The general and temporary measure prohibiting the reception of the public does not result in the loss of the rented property and does not constitute a breach by the lessor of his obligation to deliver. A tenant is not entitled to rely on this as force majeure in order to escape payment of his rent”.

Cour de cassation, no. 21-19.889 – no. 21-20.127 – no. 21-20.190