In commercial leases, the tenant's action to contest a notice to quit or to claim eviction compensation is subject to a two-year limitation period. This period runs from the effective date of the notice to quit issued by the landlord, in accordance with Articles L.145-9 and L.145-60 of the French Commercial Code.
Two rulings by the Court of Cassation on 12 February 2026 (Third Civil Chamber, Nos. 24-10.427 and 24-18.382) provide an important clarification on the impact of a pre-litigation investigative measure, particularly when a judicial expert is requested by the landlord on the basis of Article 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
In the cases submitted to the Court, the landlords had issued a notice to quit with refusal to renew and an offer of eviction compensation, and then initiated summary proceedings to obtain the appointment of a judicial expert tasked with assessing the amount of this compensation. The tenants, who were defendants in these proceedings, contented themselves with lodging protests and reservations, without associating themselves with the request for expertise or initiating substantive proceedings within the two-year time limit.
Several years later, these tenants finally brought their case before the judge to contest the notice to quit or claim compensation for eviction. The lower courts declared their actions inadmissible on grounds of prescription, a decision confirmed by the Court of Cassation.
The High Court recalls that the suspension of the statute of limitations provided for by Article 2239 of the Civil Code, when an investigative measure is ordered before any trial, only benefits the party that requested this measure. Consequently, when the landlord requests the appointment of a judicial expert, the tenant defendant does not automatically benefit from the suspensive effect.
To benefit from the suspension of the statute of limitations, the tenant must adopt a positive procedural approach, either by expressly agreeing to the request for an expert assessment, or by making a request themselves concerning the expert's mission. Otherwise, the statute of limitations continues to run against them.
The Court also specifies that an acknowledgement by the lessor of the right to eviction compensation, capable of interrupting the statute of limitations under Article 2240 of the Civil Code, must be clear, unequivocal, and unambiguous. Simple exchanges during the expert assessment or ambiguous statements are not sufficient to constitute such an acknowledgement.
These decisions recall the strictness of the two-year time limit for commercial leases. The tenant cannot simply wait for the outcome of a judicial expert assessment initiated by the landlord, nor passively participate in the summary proceedings. To preserve his rights, he must act within the two-year period, either by initiating legal proceedings himself or by expressly associating himself with the requested investigative measure. Otherwise, his claim for eviction compensation becomes inadmissible due to the statute of limitations, with potentially decisive consequences for his right to remain in the premises.