{"id":18368,"date":"2026-04-16T14:37:05","date_gmt":"2026-04-16T13:37:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/guides\/droit-commercial\/bail-commercial\/"},"modified":"2026-04-16T14:37:07","modified_gmt":"2026-04-16T13:37:07","slug":"commercial-lease","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/guides\/droit-commercial\/bail-commercial\/","title":{"rendered":"Commercial leases"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Strictly speaking, a commercial lease is not a type of contract: it is a public policy, codified in articles L. 145-1 to L. 145-60 of the French Commercial Code, which applies when certain conditions are met. Its purpose is to protect the owner of a business against the loss of his premises - and therefore, in practice, against the loss of his customer base. This is known as \u00abcommercial property\u00bb. The parties may draw up their contract as they see fit, but as soon as they fall within the scope of the statute, certain rules apply, and any clause to the contrary is deemed unwritten (article L. 145-15 of the French Commercial Code).<\/p>\n<p>This guide is written from the point of view of a lawyer talking to a company director, a property investor or a colleague dealing with a specific case. We focus less on the canonical definition of the rules than on the practical pitfalls: strict scope of application, de-capping mechanism, recoverable charges since the Pinel Act, validity of resolutory clauses in the light of case law 2025-2026, links with insolvency proceedings.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"statut\">The status: a right of the lessee, not a type of contract<\/h2>\n<p>Article L. 145-1 of the French Commercial Code sets out three cumulative conditions for the status to apply. Firstly, there must be a <strong>built-up building<\/strong> A bare plot of land, a market site or an advertising hoarding cannot, in principle, be the subject of a commercial lease. Secondly, the premises must house the\u2019<strong>actual operation of a business, industry or craft<\/strong> Simply holding premises for commercial use by a trader is not enough. Thirdly, the lessee must be <strong>registered<\/strong> in the Trade and Companies Register (RCS) or the Trade Register on the date the notice is issued or the application for renewal is made. It is this third condition that eliminates associations, the professions (which are covered by professional leases) and unregistered farmers.<\/p>\n<p>This status is a matter of public policy. A liberal professional activity, an exclusive residential use or a non-commercial warehouse can never benefit from it. This means that the parties cannot derogate from it by contract, except in the cases that the law itself provides for. A clause that excludes the lessee's right to terminate the lease every three years, that deprives the lessee of the right to renew the lease or that sets a ceiling on the eviction compensation is null and void. The penalties vary - nullity, clause deemed unwritten, reclassification of the contract - but the logic is the same: commercial property is non-negotiable.<\/p>\n<h3>Commercial lease, exceptional lease, professional lease: not to be confused<\/h3>\n<p>Three neighbouring schemes need to be carefully distinguished. The <strong>commercial lease<\/strong> under common law, which is the subject of this guide, presupposes that the conditions of article L. 145-1 have been met and is governed by public policy. The <strong>overriding lease<\/strong>, The option provided for in article L. 145-5 allows the parties to opt out of the status for a maximum period of three years, provided that it concerns a single contract or a succession of contracts relating to the same premises. After three years, or in the event of tacit extension, the lease automatically falls within the scope of the statute. Visit <strong>professional lease<\/strong>, governed by article 57 A of the law of 23 December 1986, is reserved for liberal professions: it has a minimum term of six years, but does not confer any right to renewal or eviction compensation.<\/p>\n<p>Particular vigilance is required when it comes to derogatory leases. Lessors are sometimes tempted to string together a series of short leases in order to avoid the status. The 3rd Civil Chamber is vigilant: as soon as the cumulative term exceeds three years or the lessee remains on the premises at the end of the term without dispute, a new lease is created that is subject to the statute. The consequences are radical - the term is extended to nine years, there is a right to renewal, and there is an eviction indemnity.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"duree\">Term, three-year termination, notice<\/h2>\n<p>Article L. 145-4 of the French Commercial Code sets out the <strong>minimum commercial lease term of nine years<\/strong>. The parties may stipulate a longer term (twelve years, eighteen years for certain leases with a sliding scale clause) but never less. The \u00ab3-6-9\u00bb formula, established by usage, reflects the central mechanism of the statute: the lessee may terminate at the end of each three-year period (at the end of the third and sixth years), while the lessor remains bound for the full term, save in exceptional cases.<\/p>\n<p>This asymmetry is not a detail: it is the cornerstone of the protection of the business. A lessee whose business declines or who wishes to move may leave every three years; the lessor, on the other hand, may only recover his property at the end of that period and in return for compensation. A few limited exceptions are provided for in article L. 145-4: the owner may give notice at the end of a three-year period if he wishes to build or rebuild the building, or if he wishes to exercise his right to repossess the property in order to live in it - but these cases are strictly regulated and subject to the payment of eviction compensation.<\/p>\n<h3>The form of leave<\/h3>\n<p>For a long time, notice of termination had to be given by a bailiff (now a court commissioner). The Act of 18 November 2016 and the Order of 24 October 2019 have relaxed this rule: tenants can now terminate their tenancy by <strong>registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt<\/strong> at the end of each three-year period (article L. 145-9). On the other hand <strong>lessor<\/strong> and any notice issued for refusal to renew, which gives rise to a right to eviction compensation, must be issued by a court commissioner, failing which it will be null and void.<\/p>\n<p>The deadline is <strong>six months before the expiry date<\/strong>. A notice issued late is not invalid, but it will not take effect until the next three-year term - which can represent three additional years' rent. The strictness of the formal requirements is a constant in case law: a notice of termination that does not state the required reasons (refusal to renew with an offer of eviction compensation, for example) may be disqualified and produce effects that were not intended by its author.<\/p>\n<aside class=\"encadre\">\n<div class=\"encadre-title\">To remember - The \u00ab3-6-9\u00bb approach\u00bb<\/div>\n<p>Minimum term 9 years. The lessee may give notice every 3 years (by registered letter or court order). The lessor remains committed for the full 9-year term, except in limited circumstances (repossession to live in, reconstruction, refusal to renew with eviction compensation). Notice period: 6 months before expiry.<\/p>\n<\/aside>\n<h2 id=\"loyer\">Rent: setting, indexation, three-yearly review<\/h2>\n<p>Setting the initial rent is <strong>free<\/strong>. There are no restrictions on commercial leases: a landlord can rent his premises at any market value, and the tenant is free to negotiate the amount and terms of payment. The parties agree on an amount when they sign, based on the market value, surface area, location and condition of the premises. The statute does not come into play at this stage. It is during the course of the lease, and especially when it is renewed, that disputes crystallise. At this stage, the lawyer advises anticipating the three-yearly review, the expiry of the lease and the minimum term of the commitment to avoid unpleasant surprises.<\/p>\n<h3>Indexation and sliding scale clauses<\/h3>\n<p>Almost all commercial leases provide for a <strong>indexation clause<\/strong> or sliding scale clause, which automatically adjusts the rent in line with an index. Two indices are currently used: the\u2019<strong>ILC<\/strong> (commercial rents index), for commercial and craft activities, and the\u2019<strong>ILAT<\/strong> (index of rents for tertiary activities), for offices and tertiary activities. The INSEE reference index for the cost of construction (ICC), which was historically used, has virtually disappeared for new contracts, as it was subject to sharp rises that operators could no longer withstand.<\/p>\n<p>The indexation clause must comply with a strict requirement: the <strong>index variation period<\/strong> must correspond to the <strong>rent variation period<\/strong>. A clause applying an annual index to a monthly rent, or using a different variation period, is deemed unwritten in its entirety. The 3rd Civil Chamber confirmed this again recently in a ruling dated 23 January 2025 (no. 23-18.643): while an action to have an indexation clause deemed unwritten is not subject to a limitation period, an action for recovery of undue payment is limited to the five years preceding the claim, and the claim is calculated on the basis of the rent that would have been due in the absence of a stipulation.<\/p>\n<h3>Triennial review<\/h3>\n<p>In addition to contractual indexation, article L. 145-37 gives each party the right to <strong>review every three years<\/strong>. The purpose of the review is to adjust the rent to the actual rental value. It is subject to a ceiling: the new rent may not exceed the change in the ILC or ILAT index since it was last set, unless it can be shown that there has been a change in the rental value. <strong>material modification of local commercial factors<\/strong> (article L. 145-38) which would have resulted in a change in rental value of more than 10 %.<\/p>\n<p>An action for review is brought before the commercial rents judge of the court of first instance (article R. 145-23 of the French Commercial Code). It requires a formal procedure: a preliminary statement of claim and sometimes an expert opinion. In practice, it is used less frequently than the automatic three-yearly review provided by the indexation clause, but it remains a useful tool for the lessor when the index has not kept pace with the rental value.<\/p>\n<h3>The sliding scale clause and the 25 % threshold<\/h3>\n<p>Article L. 145-39 provides for a special mechanism when the lease contains a sliding scale clause: if the clause results in the rent varying by more than a quarter in relation to the initial rent or the last rent set by a court, either party may ask the court to set the rent at the rental value - without a ceiling. This is a safety mechanism to prevent the index from spiralling out of control, but it applies in both directions: upwards and downwards.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"renouvellement\">Renewal and de-capping<\/h2>\n<p>The right to renewal is, along with the eviction indemnity, the heart of commercial property. When the lease expires (and not at the end of a three-year period), the tenant is entitled to a new nine-year lease on the same terms, except for the rent. This right is not automatic: it is exercised either by a <strong>renewal request<\/strong> emanating from the lessee (article L. 145-10), or by an <strong>renewal offer<\/strong> or, if nothing is done, by tacit extension.<\/p>\n<p>The landlord then has a choice: to accept the renewal (by proposing a rent), to refuse the renewal by paying eviction compensation, or - more rarely - to invoke a legitimate reason for refusal without payment of compensation (in particular the tenant's serious breach of his obligations, article L. 145-17).<\/p>\n<h3>The capping mechanism<\/h3>\n<p>When the lease is renewed, the rent for the renewed lease is, in principle, <strong>capped<\/strong> It may not exceed the change in the reference index since it was last set (article L. 145-34). This is the general rule, which protects the lessee against a sudden increase when his commercial property opens up a new nine-year cycle. The calculation is simple: take the current rent, apply the coefficient of variation of the ILC or ILAT index between the reference quarter of the expired lease and that of the renewed lease, and you get the capped rent.<\/p>\n<p>However, there are several exceptions to this rule, which are the real areas of dispute. De-capping is permitted where, during the expired lease, there has been a <strong>significant modification<\/strong> one of the following: the characteristics of the premises, the use to which the premises are put, the respective obligations of the parties, or the local commercial factors (article L. 145-33). If such a change is demonstrated, the rent is set at the rental value, with no ceiling.<\/p>\n<h3>Grounds for removing the ceiling allowed by case law<\/h3>\n<p>In recent years, the 3rd Civil Chamber has clarified the contours of de-capping. Three decisions are worth noting. Firstly, the decision of 23 January 2025 (no. 23-14.887), which accepts that the creation of a <strong>a new legal obligation for lessors<\/strong> - in this case, the obligation of the non-occupying co-owner to take out insurance, created by the ALUR Act of 24 March 2014, constitutes a factor in the removal of the ceiling, regardless of whether this insurance was voluntarily taken out beforehand. Secondly, the judgment of 15 February 2023 (no. 21-25.849), which states that a transfer of the right to a lease with despecialisation, without opposition from the lessor, does not deprive him of the right to invoke the change of use in support of a request for an increase in the rent at the next renewal. Lastly, the decision of 7 May 2025 (no. 23-15.394), which, on the other hand, rules out the possibility that a contractual obligation to pay in advance sums exceeding two rental terms (having as its counterpart the legal obligation to pay interest under article L. 145-40) may in itself reduce the rental value.<\/p>\n<p>Landlords wishing to remove the ceiling must therefore put together a detailed dossier covering material changes, legal changes and commercial changes. Simply citing market value is never enough. Conversely, tenants defending the cap must try to minimise the extent of the changes and show that they are ordinary or compensated for.<\/p>\n<h3>Spreading the de-capped increase<\/h3>\n<p>When the ceiling is removed, the last paragraph of article L. 145-34 provides a protective mechanism: the rent increase resulting from the removal of the ceiling is <strong>spread out in increments of 10 % per year<\/strong>. This is a valuable buffer for lessees whose rent could double or triple. But beware: in a decision dated 25 January 2023 (no. 21-21.943), the 3rd Civil Chamber ruled that this spread does not fall within the remit of the commercial rents judge, who is only responsible for setting the price. It is therefore up to the tenant to invoke it expressly, usually in separate proceedings or by way of exception.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"eviction\">Refusal to renew and eviction compensation<\/h2>\n<p>A landlord who refuses to renew without legitimate reason must pay the lessee a <strong>eviction compensation<\/strong>, Under article L. 145-14, the purpose of this compensation is to make good \u00abthe loss caused by the failure to renew\u00bb. This compensation, equal to the value of the business, is the economic counterpart of commercial property. It is designed to enable the tenant to relocate - and, in practice, it often does not.<\/p>\n<h3>The calculation<\/h3>\n<p>Eviction compensation has two main components. First, the <strong>value of the business<\/strong> or, if the business can be relocated without loss of customers, the value of the leasehold rights. The value of the business is assessed at the date of eviction, using the usual valuation methods (sales, EBITDA, sector comparisons). Next, the <strong>ancillary benefits<\/strong> These include relocation costs, removal expenses, temporary loss of business, staff redundancy costs where applicable, double rent during the transition period, and sometimes commercial disruption.<\/p>\n<p>If the lessor disputes the amount, he must do so before the commercial rents judge, who will rule after an expert appraisal. Litigation is dense and technical - the value of the business depends on accounting assumptions and the state of the market - and the average length of a valuation procedure can be two to three years.<\/p>\n<h3>Staying in your home<\/h3>\n<p>As long as the eviction compensation has not actually been paid, the lessee is entitled to <strong>right to remain in the premises<\/strong> under the conditions of the expired lease (article L. 145-28). During this period, the tenant continues to pay an \u00aboccupancy indemnity\u00bb, which in practice is set by the judge at an amount close to the renewed rent. Continued occupancy is essential: it guarantees the tenant enjoyment of the premises until the indemnity is actually paid, and prevents the landlord from forcing the tenant to leave before payment has been made.<\/p>\n<p>The 3rd Civil Chamber strongly reaffirmed this in a decision dated 25 January 2023 (no. 21-19.089): the deprivation of the possibility of continuing to operate on the premises until the compensation has been paid, in disregard of the right to continue to do so, gives rise to a loss of income. <strong>separate damage<\/strong> the loss of the business itself, which the judge must assess. In other words, a landlord who evicts prematurely will pay twice: the value of the land, and the loss of earnings that would have been possible if the lease had been maintained.<\/p>\n<aside class=\"encadre\">\n<div class=\"encadre-title\">The owner's right of option<\/div>\n<p>As long as the decision setting the eviction compensation has not become final, the lessor retains the option of withdrawing his refusal to renew and accepting the renewal (article L. 145-58). This option, which must be exercised within fifteen days of the decision becoming irrevocable, is an important valve in practice - it allows a lessor who belatedly discovers the real cost of eviction to return to the table.<\/p>\n<\/aside>\n<h2 id=\"cession\">Assignment, sublease, despecialisation<\/h2>\n<p>The regulations deal separately with three operations that affect the long-term future of the business: transferring the lease, subletting and despecialisation. Each has its own logic.<\/p>\n<h3>Transfer of the lease attached to the business<\/h3>\n<p>Article L. 145-16 of the French Commercial Code lays down a strong rule: <strong>clauses prohibiting the lessee from transferring his lease to the purchaser of his business are deemed unwritten<\/strong>. This rule protects the value of the business: without freedom of transfer, the business cannot be sold. In principle, therefore, tenants can transfer their lease as part of a business transfer without having to seek the landlord's agreement. In practice, leases often contain an approval clause that the lessee must implement - but the owner can only refuse on legitimate grounds relating to the solvency or reputation of the transferee.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, the isolated transfer of leasehold rights - which does not accompany the transfer of the business - may be validly prohibited or subject to the lessor's approval. It is this distinction that explains why so many disputes concern the classification of a transaction: \u00abis it a transfer of business, or a disguised transfer of leasehold rights? The answer depends on an analysis of the items transferred (customer base, trade name, leasehold rights, equipment, employment contracts), and the judge will conduct a detailed examination.<\/p>\n<h3>Sub-letting: an authorisation that has become an exception<\/h3>\n<p>Unlike a sale, a <strong>subletting is prohibited in principle<\/strong> unless otherwise stipulated or expressly authorised by the lessor (article L. 145-31). In practice, many leases contain an express clause authorising or prohibiting subletting; tenants wishing to sublet should carefully check the wording of this clause before signing a contract with a sub-occupier... The rule is the reverse of that for assignment: the landlord has the right to refuse, and his refusal does not have to be justified. Where sub-letting is authorised and the sub-rent is higher than the main rent, the landlord may require the main rent to be increased accordingly.<\/p>\n<h3>Despecialisation<\/h3>\n<p>During the term of the lease, the tenant remains bound by the <strong>destination of premises<\/strong> stipulated in the contract. However, economic developments sometimes require a change of activity. The statute provides for two mechanisms. The <strong>partial despecialisation<\/strong> (article L. 145-47) allows lessees to add related or complementary activities to their contractual business, simply by notifying the lessor, without the need for agreement. The <strong>full despecialisation<\/strong> (article L. 145-48) allows tenants to change their business entirely, but this requires a more cumbersome procedure - reasoned notification, right of first refusal on the part of the landlord, the latter's right to revise the rent in compensation.<\/p>\n<p>The ruling of the 3rd Civil Chamber of 15 February 2023 (no. 21-25.849) clarified a delicate situation. When the right to a lease is transferred with a change of business activity under the conditions set out in article L. 145-51 (transfer to the purchaser of a business with a change of business activity), the rent is maintained until the end of the lease term. However, this does not deprive the lessor of the right to invoke this change of use in support of a request for the rent to be increased at the time of the next renewal. This is an important warning for the transferee lessee: despecialisation that is not a problem today can be costly at the next renewal.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"charges\">Charges, works, inventory of fixtures and fittings: what the Pinel law has changed<\/h2>\n<p>Law 2014-626 of 18 June 2014, known as the Pinel Law, has radically overhauled the system of charges and works in commercial leases. Prior to 2014, conventional practice gave landlords considerable latitude to pass on the bulk of charges, taxes and even certain structural works to tenants. The Pinel Act put an end to this drift.<\/p>\n<h3>A precise and restrictive inventory of expenses<\/h3>\n<p>Article L. 145-40-2 requires the lessor to include in the contract a description of the terms and conditions of the lease. <strong>precise and restrictive inventory<\/strong> the categories of charges, taxes and fees relating to the lease, and the breakdown of these charges between lessor and lessee. Any charges not mentioned cannot be recovered. A decree dated 3 November 2014 (codified in article R. 145-35 of the French Commercial Code) specifies which charges <strong>may under no circumstances<\/strong> be charged to the tenant: major repairs under article 606 of the French Civil Code, rental management fees, tax on the lessor's rental income, compliance work resulting from a defect attributable to the landlord.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, the lessor must provide the lessee with an annual <strong>annual summary statement<\/strong> expenses, showing the settlement and adjustment of accounts (article R. 145-36). This statement must be sent before 30 September of the year following the financial year - a mandatory deadline. In 2026, the 3rd Civil Chamber clarified two essential points. Firstly, in a decision dated 29 January 2026 (no. 24-14.982), it ruled that in order to fulfil his obligation to provide supporting documents, the lessor must <strong>send<\/strong> to a tenant who requests them, without being able to simply make them available. On the other hand, in a ruling of the same day (no. 24-16.270), the court tempered the rigour of the provision: a landlord who has not communicated the statement within the time limit is not obliged to return the advance payments made if he can prove to the court the existence and amount of the charges due.<\/p>\n<h3>The works<\/h3>\n<p>The allocation of works follows the same logic: routine maintenance is the tenant's responsibility, structural repairs the owner's: the owner is responsible for major repairs (shell, roof, load-bearing structures) and work made necessary by obsolescence or force majeure; the tenant is responsible for maintenance repairs and embellishment work related to the operation. Since 2014, any clause contrary to this legal division of responsibilities has been ruled out.<\/p>\n<h3>Inventory of fixtures on arrival and departure<\/h3>\n<p>Article L. 145-40-1 requires the drafting of a <strong>joint inventory of fixtures<\/strong> on entering and leaving the premises. If this is not done, and if the lessor fails to summon the lessee in vain, the latter cannot invoke the presumption of good condition set out in article 1731 of the Civil Code - he will have to prove each deterioration. This is a strong protection for tenants, and a frequent source of disputes when the pre-2014 lease did not include an initial inventory of fixtures.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"clause-resolutoire\">The resolutory clause and payment disputes<\/h2>\n<p>La <strong>resolutory clause<\/strong> is the clause by which the parties agree that the lease will be terminated automatically if the lessee fails to meet his obligations - typically, failure to pay rent. It is expressly authorised by article L. 145-41, which sets out strict conditions for its implementation.<\/p>\n<h3>The one-month period after the order<\/h3>\n<p>Article L. 145-41 stipulates that any resolutory clause shall only take effect if\u2019<strong>one month after an unsuccessful summons to pay<\/strong>. This period is a matter of public policy: the lessor cannot reduce it by contract. In practice, the summons is issued by a court commissioner, expressly refers to the resolutory clause in the lease, and reproduces the text of article L. 145-41 as well as the terms of the clause.<\/p>\n<p>In two judgments handed down on 6 November 2025 (no. 23-21.334 and no. 23-21.454), the 3rd Civil Chamber definitively settled a question that had been causing a stir in practice: whether a <strong>resolutory clause stipulating a period of less than one month<\/strong> shall be deemed unwritten <em>in its entirety<\/em>, and not simply deemed unwritten in the part that contradicts the law. This solution applies even to leases entered into prior to the Pinel Act of 18 June 2014, provided that proceedings to establish that the clause has been acquired are underway on the date on which the Act comes into force. In practical terms, a lessor who relies on a fortnight or three-week clause - common in leases from the 1990s and 2000s - loses all contractual effectiveness and must revert to the legal regime.<\/p>\n<h3>Judicial suspension and granting of time limits<\/h3>\n<p>The judge may, at the request of the tenant, <strong>suspend the effects of the resolutory clause<\/strong> and grant payment deadlines (article L. 145-41 paragraph 2 and article 1343-5 of the Civil Code). Suspension may be granted for any type of breach, not just non-payment: the 3rd Civil Chamber expressly reiterated this in a judgment of 6 February 2025 (no. 23-18.360), overturning a judgment that had limited this power to the sole case of non-payment of rent. But once deadlines have been granted, compliance with them is a strict condition: failure to meet the deadlines renders the clause definitively acquired, without the landlord's bad faith in relying on it being an obstacle (Cass. 3e civ., 26 October 2023, no. 22-16.216).<\/p>\n<h3>The exception of non-performance and the resolutory clause<\/h3>\n<p>A recent advance in case law is worth noting. In a judgment of 5 March 2026 (no. 24-15.820), the 3rd Civil Chamber ruled that where a tenant, when served with a notice of termination, relies on a <strong>exception of non-performance<\/strong> - For example, because the landlord has failed to fulfil his obligation to deliver or maintain the property - the judge must check that the order is well-founded, regardless of whether the tenant has not applied to the courts for a delay in payment within one month of the order being issued. This is a new form of protection for tenants involved in disputes: they no longer have to make the tactical choice between asking for time or pleading mutual non-performance.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"contentieux\">Jurisdiction and procedure<\/h2>\n<p>Commercial lease disputes follow a precise division. The <strong>commercial rents judge<\/strong> court (article R. 145-23 of the French Commercial Code) only has jurisdiction over disputes relating to the <strong>price fixing<\/strong> of the revised or renewed lease. Everything else - termination, eviction, eviction compensation, requalification, validity of the resolutory clause, recoverable charges - is a matter for the courts. <strong>judicial tribunal sitting as a panel<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>This duality is a source of procedural complications. Proceedings may be brought before the commercial rents judge to set the rent for a new lease, while parallel proceedings are brought before the magistrates' court to contest the eviction indemnity or the resolutory clause. Coordination between the two sets of proceedings requires a strategy on the part of the lawyer - stay of proceedings, joinder, prioritisation of pleas - without which the case can fall apart.<\/p>\n<p>Referral to the commercial rents judge presupposes the drafting of a <strong>memory<\/strong> complies with the requirements of article R. 145-23 et seq. Representation by a lawyer is compulsory before the court in commercial lease matters, and strongly recommended before the commercial rents judge given the technical nature of the matter. A legal expert's report is almost always ordered for questions of rental value or valuation of the business premises, which considerably lengthens the procedure: it takes twelve to eighteen months for rent-setting proceedings, and two to three years for disputes over eviction compensation.<\/p>\n<p>For both lessors and lessees, commercial leases are an area where anticipation is just as important as defence in court. Most disputes can be avoided by rigorous drafting when the lease is signed, careful monitoring of three-yearly expiry dates, and vigilance with regard to inventories of fixtures and fittings and recoverable charges. When they do arise, the firm will advise you and assist you in litigation, on both the lessor's and lessee's side, before the commercial rents judge and the Marseilles magistrates' court - and beyond, anywhere in France where the nature of the case warrants it. <a href=\"\/en\/commercial-lawyer\/\">Discover our expertise in commercial law<\/a> for an initial discussion of your situation.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Le bail commercial est le contrat par lequel un propri\u00e9taire loue un local affect\u00e9 \u00e0 l&rsquo;exploitation d&rsquo;un fonds de commerce, industriel ou artisanal. R\u00e9gi par les articles L. 145-1 \u00e0 L. 145-60 du Code de commerce, il offre au preneur une protection forte, dite \u00ab propri\u00e9t\u00e9 commerciale \u00bb : dur\u00e9e minimale de neuf ans, droit au renouvellement, indemnit\u00e9 d&rsquo;\u00e9viction en cas de refus. C&rsquo;est aussi un terrain de contentieux dense \u2014 d\u00e9plafonnement du loyer, charges r\u00e9cup\u00e9rables, clause r\u00e9solutoire, d\u00e9sp\u00e9cialisation. Ce guide expose le statut tel qu&rsquo;il se pratique en 2026, \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re de la jurisprudence la plus r\u00e9cente.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"parent":18290,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"page-templates\/template-guide-enfant.php","meta":{"footnotes":""},"solent_domaine":[440,412],"class_list":["post-18368","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18368","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=18368"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18368\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18369,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18368\/revisions\/18369"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18290"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18368"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"solent_domaine","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/solent-avocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/solent_domaine?post=18368"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}