PV Exploitation France convicted

The Albertville Court of Justice (6 February 2026, No. 24/00775) ordered SAS PV Exploitation France to pay €15,600.46 in rent arrears to Mr. [K] [J] for the period from 15 February 2020 to 10 November 2021, plus statutory interest from 30 November 2020.

Key points:

1. Rejection of PV Exploitation France’s arguments:
   • The court rejected the argument of partial loss of the leased property (Article 1722 of the Civil Code) and the exception of non-performance, in accordance with the case law of the Court of Cassation (judgments of 30 June and 23 November 2022): administrative closures related to Covid-19 do not constitute a loss of the leased property, as they were general, temporary and not directly related to the premises.
   • The lessor properly fulfilled its obligation to deliver, as the inability to operate the tourist residence was the result of government measures, not its fault.
2. Proof of unpaid rent:
   • Mr [K] [J] produced invoices and statements proving the arrears, which were partially acknowledged by PV Exploitation France.
3. Payment deadlines refused:
   • The company did not prove that its current economic situation justified a payment plan.
4. Order to pay costs and expenses:
   • PV Exploitation France must pay €2,500 to Mr [K] [J] pursuant to Article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
   • The provisional enforcement is maintained.

Consequence: PV Exploitation France must pay the amount due immediately, without further delay.

Unpaid rent in tourist residences: the Albertville Magistrates’ Court confirms that it is payable during the health crisis (judgment of 6 February 2026)

A key decision for landlords faced with Covid arguments from operators

In a judgement handed down on 6 February 2026, the Albertville Magistrates’ Court provided a further illustration of the now well-established case law on commercial rents during a health crisis. In a dispute between a landlord and a tourist residence operator, the court confirmed that rents remained due despite the administrative closures linked to Covid-19, except in special circumstances.

This decision is of major practical interest to landlords of managed residences faced with unilateral rent suspensions by managers.

Background: a claim for payment of rent arrears

The dispute concerned a landlord who had leased several units within a tourist residence initially operated by a company belonging to the MGM group, then taken over by an entity belonging to the Pierre & Vacances group.

The lessor claimed payment of rent arrears for the period covering, in particular, the administrative closures of 2020 and 2021.

The operator contested the debt, invoking several classic arguments: partial loss of the leased property, exception of non-performance, force majeure and extinction of the cause.

No loss of the leased property despite administrative closures

The court reiterated the consistent position of the Court of Cassation that general and temporary measures prohibiting the admission of the public during the pandemic do not constitute a loss of property within the meaning of Article 1722 of the Civil Code.

The judges emphasised that these measures were not attributable to the lessor and did not specifically target the leased premises. They were part of a decision in the public interest related to the protection of public health.

Consequently, the operator cannot claim an automatic reduction or suspension of rent.

Exception of non-performance rejected: no breach by the lessor

The operator also argued that the lessor had failed in its obligation to deliver and ensure peaceful enjoyment.

The court rejected this argument, emphasising that the impossibility of operating the site was the result of government decisions and not a fault on the part of the lessor, who had delivered the premises in accordance with their contractual purpose.

The decision usefully clarifies that the obligation to deliver does not imply a guarantee of profitability or commercialisation of the site.

Order to pay rent and refusal to grant a payment extension

After examining the accounting documents, the court set the rent arrears at €15,600.46 and ordered the operator to pay this amount plus interest.

The request for an extension of the payment deadline was rejected on the grounds that the debtor had not justified his current financial situation, emphasising that the granting of an extension requires a precise demonstration of the difficulties.

Practical lessons for landlords of managed residences

This ruling confirms several key principles concerning commercial leases in tourist residences:

• the administrative closure linked to Covid does not automatically suspend the obligation to pay rent;
• the landlord is not responsible for the impossibility of operating when this results from general measures;
• the economic burden of the crisis cannot be transferred to the lessor in the absence of a specific contractual provision.

For investors, this decision provides solid support in disputes relating to unpaid rent during the pandemic.

A well-established trend in case law

By ordering the operator to pay the rent arrears and rejecting the defences based on the health crisis, the Albertville Magistrates’ Court is following the case law of the Court of Cassation.

This decision confirms that, unless there is a contractual agreement or special circumstances, operators of tourist residences remain bound by their rental obligations even in times of major economic disruption.

Do not hesitate to contact us to ask us your questions via the contact form at the bottom of the homepage.