THEthe social landlord who wants to put a tenant out because he has failed in his obligation to“ use the rented premises peacefully ” must ask the judge for permission. He gets it more easily if this troublemaker is guilty of violence on the janitor, than if he assaulted neighbors, as the following case recalls.
For several years, Mme Z quietly occupies social housing in Bron (Rhône). In May 2011, his son, then aged 16, fired a rifle on two employees of the lessor, the Public Office for Planning and Construction (OPAC) of the Rhône, which earned him a court sentence. for children from Lyon.
In agreement with the OPAC, Mme Z immediately leaves the premises – where the court will forbid his son to return. It is relocated at the other end of the Lyon conurbation, in the town of Caluire-et-Cuire.
Alas, on November 19, 2014, his son returned to Bron to take revenge on the two employees. The Lyon criminal court found him guilty of violence with a weapon, and sentenced him to prison, partially accompanied by the suspended sentence, with probation.
The OPAC then assigns Mme Z, in order to obtain the termination of his lease, to “Breach of the obligation of peaceful use of the leased premises”. She protests first that it is not she who committed the acts, but her son, who does not hold the lease. But case law considers that the tenant is responsible for the disturbances caused by those he lodges (09-11.027).
Extensive interpretation
M’s lawyerme Z maintains that it is not possible to terminate the lease for acts which were committed ten kilometers from the leased premises. He assures that the judge must “Establish the existence of a link” between the disturbances observed and the breach; which, in practice, means that these disorders must intervene “In the rented places” or in their immediate surroundings, such as the common areas.
In fact, the case law he invokes only concerns violence committed against neighbors. It is much less severe, as shown in a judgment of October 14, 2009 (08–16,955): the Court of Cassation refused to terminate the lease of a tenant by having attacked others, because the facts “ had been clerk in the hall of a building belonging [certes] the same building complex as the one where the leased premises are located, but more than one kilometer away “.
On the other hand, when the violence targets an employee of the lessor, the requirement of this ” link “ disappears ; which means that “The place of [leur] commission [importe] little “, as the judge of the Court of Cassation, on December 17, 2020 (18-24.823), by making the obligation of peaceful enjoyment of the leased premises an extensive interpretation. So much the better for the concierge… but too bad for the neighbors!